In article ,
Rick wrote:

On Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:28:27 -0800, Jan Flora wrote:

Billy, Charlie, Everyone --

Go read this:

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/f...monsanto200805

Jan


I happen to use several of Monsanto's products to great effect, but they do
tend to get carried away with their patent infringement battles. Still, they
sell a product and people who intentionally steal it ought to expect legal
trouble.
Rick, you must be the last person in the world to hear about the Percy
Schmeiser and Monsanto. I'll tell you the story and at the end you can
tell me how big a crook Percy Schmeiser is.

Part I

www.arkinstitute.com

An ill-wind blew across Percy Schmeiser's land in 1996. Today in his
70s, the third-generation Saskatchewan, Canada, farmer has been growing
and improving his own canola (oil seed) crops for 40 years. Each year,
he would save some of his harvested seed for planting the following
year. Though some farmers in the surrounding area were growing
Monsanto's patented, genetically modified (GM) Roundup Ready canola,
Schmeiser was not. He was growing his own, but the wind blew and bees
flew, both apparently carrying grains of GM pollen from neighboring
fields into Schmeiser's crop. Or maybe it was GM seed transported
from surrounding farms that often blew off trucks traveling the roads
adjacent to Schmeiser's land. No matter. Without his knowledge or
consent, errant, patented Monsanto genes had apparently been
incorporated into some of the Schmeiser family's 1997-harvested canola
seed.

In 1998, the farmer planted over a thousand acres of his land with the
seed he had saved from the previous year's crop. A hired Monsanto
investigator analyzed samples of canola plants taken from Percy
Schmeiser's land, and thecompany found evidence of its patented genes in
the plant tissue. When Schmeiser refused to pay Monsanto fees for use
of its patented herbicide resistance technology, technology he neither
bought nor wanted, Monsanto sued him. According to a report on the
trial (www.percyschmeiser.com), Monsanto sought damages for patent
infringement totaling $400,000. This included about $250,000 in legal
fees, $13,500 for technology fees, $25,000 in punitive damages and
$105,000 in the profits Schmeiser realized from sale of his contaminated
1998 crop.

Monsanto vs. Percy Schmeiser was heard in a Canadian court June 5 - 20,
2000. According to reports, Monsanto never directly tried to explain
how their genes got into Schmeiser's field. In fact, the Western
Producer, a Canadian agriculture magazine, quoted Monsanto attorney,
Roger Hughes, as saying, "Whether Mr. Schmeiser knew of the matter or
not matters not at all." In other words, Schmeiser's fields were
contaminated by Monsanto's GM technology, and it didn't matter if
Schmeiser was aware of the contamination or not. They were
going to make him pay for it! Percy Schmeiser said, "It was a very
frightening thing because they said it does not matter how it gets into
a farmer's field; it's their property... if I would go to St. Louis
(Monsanto headquarters) and contaminate their plots--destroy what they
have worked on for 40 years--I think I would be put in jail and the key
thrown away."

On March 29, 2001, nearly three years since the contaminated canola was
discovered in Schmeiser's field, Canadian Judge W. Andrew MacKay agreed
with Monsanto that it did not matter how its genes got onto Percy
Schmeiser's fields; the farmer was still guilty of having them without
having paid for the privilege. (You can read the entire decision at
http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca ). Sadly, as part of the damages, the farmer
also lost 40 years of work improving his own canola seed line, as his
crop was confiscated.

As you might imagine, the decision has had a chilling effect on farmers
here and around the world. The Washington Post reported that a National
Farmers Union spokesman said the organization has been following the
Monsanto vs. Schmeiser case "...with apprehension. We're extremely
concerned by what liabilities may unfold for the farmer, particularly
with cross-pollination of genetically modified plants."
The National Farmers Union represents 300,000 U.S. farmers and ranchers.
Monsanto has filed hundreds of similar patent infringement lawsuits
against farmers in the U.S. and Canada. Some of those farmers in North
Dakota and Illinois are counter-suing the company for deliberately
causing genetic pollution and then suing its victims. Win or lose, many
face financial ruin from the court battles alone.

The Percy Schmeiser case, and others ongoing and to come, do not bode
well for farmers, or even backyard gardeners, here or abroad. The idea
that individuals can be held legally and financially responsible for the
fate of patented pollen and seed blown by the wind or carried by insects
in open field conditions is simply absurd.

Part II
http://www.percyschmeiser.com/RRCanola%20Returns.htm

He is as persistent as the Roundup Ready canola that keeps appearing in
his fields. Percy Schmeiser is back in the news, threatening to file a
lawsuit against his nemesis, Monsanto Canada.

The Bruno, Sask., farmer, who lost a high-profile legal battle against
the biotech company that made it to the Supreme Court of Canada, is
butting heads with Monsanto again over Roundup Ready plants on his land.
Schmeiser, who is prohibited by the courts from growing Monsanto's
genetically modified canola, contacted the firm in late September about
volunteer plants that he said had invaded his 50-acre, chemical-fallow
field.

"It's almost identical to how my field was contaminated in 1998," said
the farmer, who travels the world speaking about his fight with Monsanto.

According to the 2004 Supreme Court ruling, 95 to 98 percent of the
1,000 acres of canola Schmeiser grew in 1998 comprised Roundup Ready
plants he knowingly cultivated. Schmeiser, who has never admitted to
planting brown bag seed despite being found guilty by three different
courts of violating Monsanto's patent, claimed this latest incident
parallels what happened seven years ago.
----------

Percy won the latest contest with Monsanto only because he took it to
small claims court. If he had sued for appropriate damages and went to a
jury trial, Monsanto would have skinned him on legal fees alone.

Monsanto's product ruined Mr. Schmeiser's 1998 crop. A thousand acres of
soy beans. It was never shown that Mr. Schmeiser intentionally planted
Monsanto's seeds but it was shown that it was his habit to save seeds to
plant for the following year's crop.

So, Rick, in your estimation, how guilty is Mr. Schmeiser?



I do know that if ones fields are "contaminated" with Monsanto GM crops, one
can charge Monsanto for their removal- at least in Canada!
Small Farmer Wins Moral Victory Over Monsanto
http://www.naturalnews.com/022918.html

One has to stay within the realm of small claims court to win these
pyrrhic victories.
--

Billy

Impeach Pelosi, Bush & Cheney to the Hague
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/
http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/