Thread: Monsanto
View Single Post
  #39   Report Post  
Old 22-12-2009, 12:49 PM posted to rec.gardens.edible
phorbin phorbin is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2008
Posts: 544
Default Monsanto

In article , says...

"Steve" wrote in message
ews.com...
On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 17:24:47 -0800, Wildbilly
wrote:

IF a farmer has his crop cross pollinated by a patented crop, what is he
supposed to do?


What he is supposed to do is beyond the scope of this argument.
What he is NOT supposed to do is identify, isolate, and propagate
someone else's patented property.

There should be a law to protect others from Monsanto crops infecting
surrounding fields. This is were the big problem lies.


There are supposed to be buffer fields to do that.

*They*don't*work* and there is constant pressure to reduce the size of
the buffers.

GM rapeseed/canola *has escaped* and is *growing in the wild as a weed*
so there's no stopping it and no controlling it. Of course it's more
prevalent in canola growing districts. (The core area of my city isn't a
canola district and it crops up here.)

Monsanto has never been naive enough to believe that they could stop the
genes from spreading. Buffer zones can slow it, not arrest it as noted
above. The reason they've focused on bullying farmers is that they know
the gene is going to escape and farmers are an easily mangled(sic)
target; a strategic pinch-point, if you will.

Monsanto has enough smart, if evil minds to have worked it out ahead of
time. Every action Monsanto launches in protection of its patent has to
be seen within this context. --If I put myself in their planners'
position I would see the spread as reasonable leverage to put more
pressure on the buffer zones *because* the gene has escaped into the
wild and the buffer zones have become irrelevant.

The question that I think has to be asked at all levels is, "Is it
reasonable to assume that at the outset, Monsanto could have predicted
the spread of the GM canola/rapeseed gene far beyond the borders of
licensed farms to other farms and into the wild?"

If yes, and I believe the answer is yes, then the patent should be
revoked, precedent set, and Monsanto held accountable in a significant,
non-costofdoingbusiness way.

Time's up. Gotta run.