Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
Recently I've seen a couple of phals with "vegetative propagation
prohibited" printed on the name tag. I know that some major corporations are filing for plant patents. I hear about this more when they have "Genetically altered Corn" or other major cash crops. I'd like to have a discussion here about plant patents and orchids. Is it fair that I spend my time and selective breeding to create a navy blue phalanopsis and get all kinds of awards on it only to sell a clone of it and have someone else make a thousand copies? If I pay my good money for a plant don't I have some rights to make copies of it? What if it sends out a keiki on its own? Do I have to destroy that keiki? Would I go to jail if I sell that keiki? I'm sure there are some opinions on this topic out there in Orchid Land. Good Growing, Gene |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
Gene,
Death to the orchid-patenting greedy *******s... and to the patent lawyers working for them. Mick |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
I'm sure there are some opinions on this topic out
there in Orchid Land. My opinion isn't a legal opinion in any way, shape or form, but just some musings. I can understand a plant being patented that took a lot of outside influence to make it come into being (Aren't genetically altered plants actually modified scientifically and there is *no way* that those mods could have happened naturally??) I'm more leery of patents on plants that can come about naturally. Let's say you cross plant A and plant B and come up with plant C and want to patent that. Does that mean that *I* can't cross my own plants A and B and make a C? I guess I look at plant patents (of the regular 'We crossed A with B and got C' type) on the same lines as copyrighted music from a CD. Once I buy the CD, it's legal for me to copy that music to any medium I like and use it for my own pleasure. I can even copy the entire CD and give it to a friend. But I *can't* copy the entire CD and sell it to that friend. Tracey |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
Gene Schurg wrote:
Recently I've seen a couple of phals with "vegetative propagation prohibited" printed on the name tag. I know that some major corporations are filing for plant patents. I hear about this more when they have "Genetically altered Corn" or other major cash crops. Great topic! There are plenty of patented rose varieties. And fruit trees (almost any new introduction is protected by either patent or a royalty system). Actually, it seems that almost anything 'new and improved' has a patent on it these days. Maybe I should patent the concept of patenting everything... You don't have to be a major corporation, but it does cost a non-trivial amount of money to get the patent. And even more to enforce the patent. I'd like to have a discussion here about plant patents and orchids. Is it fair that I spend my time and selective breeding to create a navy blue phalanopsis and get all kinds of awards on it only to sell a clone of it and have someone else make a thousand copies? No, but life isn't fair. If you sell a clone of your blue phal, you should sell it for its market value. If its value includes the potential of somebody making a zillion copies, you should include that competition in your price. This is why some Paph clones go for 10,000+ US. You are buying the right to compete with the owner in making hybrids. Phals are no different. If you don't want competition, don't sell plants to competitors... Anyway, I have nothing against plant patents per se, but I don't think they are very enforceable unless somebody does something exceedingly stupid. If your plant is patented, and you see them appear in DoorMart by the trillions, and you didn't license it, it is relatively easy to sue the bejeezus out of the violator. If somebody is selling a patented plant out of their nursery, and can't prove that they bought or licensed the production, then that is also pretty easy to enforce. Lawyers cost money, though. A better strategy for cloneable orchids might be to not sell a clone until you can sell a great many clones. Contract it out if you have to. If you think a competetor can make money selling your plant, then you should have faith that you can do it as well. That is what I would do if I had a navy blue phal. If I pay my good money for a plant don't I have some rights to make copies of it? What if it sends out a keiki on its own? Do I have to destroy that keiki? Would I go to jail if I sell that keiki? You won't go to jail for selling a single keiki, because it is a civil matter not a criminal matter. The patent holder might sue you in civil court for damages, but lawyers cost money, so you would have to be a big target to make it worthwhile. I'm not a lawyer, but I think that 'fair use' is a relatively established concept. A good analogy might be videotape or music. It is well established that you are allowed to make a copy of a purchased item for your personal use. You are not allowed to make a lot of copies and sell or give them to your friends and neighbors. At that point you are competing with the copyright holder for business, and they have every right to nail you to the wall. They will take your money, but you won't go to jail. You can breed with a plant that says "Vegetative propagation prohibited", since that is sexual propagation. No worries there. Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
Gene Schurg wrote: Recently I've seen a couple of phals with "vegetative propagation prohibited" printed on the name tag. I know that some major corporations are filing for plant patents. I hear about this more when they have "Genetically altered Corn" or other major cash crops. I'd like to have a discussion here about plant patents and orchids. Is it fair that I spend my time and selective breeding to create a navy blue phalanopsis and get all kinds of awards on it only to sell a clone of it and have someone else make a thousand copies? If I pay my good money for a plant don't I have some rights to make copies of it? What if it sends out a keiki on its own? Do I have to destroy that keiki? Would I go to jail if I sell that keiki? I'm sure there are some opinions on this topic out there in Orchid Land. Good Growing, Gene Gene; I think it is fair that if someone made a new hybrid to restrict anyone else from making clones of it. However, a patent does not prevent anyone else from attempting to make the same (or a better) cross from the original parents (assuming they are available to everyone). A patent also does not prevent one to using that plant further in hybridizing, AFAIK. Restrictions on vegetative propagation is unenforceable if one does not sell any of the plants. Regards, |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 13:31:11 -0400, "Mick Fournier"
wrote in Message-Id: : Death to the orchid-patenting greedy *******s... It's good to see the OLD Mick is back. :-) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 13:31:11 -0400, "Mick Fournier"
wrote in Message-Id: : Death to the orchid-patenting greedy *******s... It's good to see the OLD Mick is back. :-) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
I read the situation thus: I cannot purposely clone Phal. Summer Beach (Ken
Peterson x Mama Cass), which I own and is patented by another. But if a keike forms naturally I will be free to do with it what I choose, including placing it on the sale table at a meeting. Also, provided that Ken Peterson and Mama Cass are not somehow protected, I see no reason why I could not cross them. After all, I'm sure the recipe for Pepperidge Farms Sausalito cookies is protected, but nothing says that I can't take flour, eggs, Macadamia nuts, giant milk chocolate chips, etc, and make my own, which, by the way, are far better than the Pepperidge Farms variety. Now I'm hungry. VBS Diana |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
That's what I like about Mick.....Cut through the crap and gets right to the
point! "Mick Fournier" wrote in message ... Gene, Death to the orchid-patenting greedy *******s... and to the patent lawyers working for them. Mick |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
I agree with what you all have said about crossing the parents and "trying"
to create your own but you probably won't get identical results. There are people out there dedicating their lives to creating that special orchid with a particular feature and someone may create the first big blue phal or paph rothchildianum with 20 flowers or whatever someone else dreams up. I chose phals for my example because you can clone a bizillion of them using current asexual techniques. I just thought this would make some good conversation while we wait for the orchids to grow. Gene |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
Diana Kulaga wrote:
I read the situation thus: I cannot purposely clone Phal. Summer Beach (Ken Peterson x Mama Cass), which I own and is patented by another. But if a keike forms naturally I will be free to do with it what I choose, including placing it on the sale table at a meeting. Not exactly. Summer Beach is fair game. I believe you can only patent a specific cultivar (clone, in orchid speak). So, you can do what you want with any in the grex Phal Summer Beach, but you are restricted with Phal. Summer Beach "Patent SOB". In practical terms you can do whatever you want with the keikis, since you wouldn't ever have enough to hit the radar screen of the greedy SOB that holds the patent. But he _could_ go after you if you sold them, if he had infinite time, money, and somebody ratted you out. Not likely. Also, provided that Ken Peterson and Mama Cass are not somehow protected, I see no reason why I could not cross them. You could cross them even if they were patented. You just can't asexually reproduce them. Everyday commonplace sexual reproduction is still allowed (thank goodness). After all, I'm sure the recipe for Pepperidge Farms Sausalito cookies is protected, but nothing says that I can't take flour, eggs, Macadamia nuts, giant milk chocolate chips, etc, and make my own, which, by the way, are far better than the Pepperidge Farms variety. Now I'm hungry. VBS Oh, now you've done it. I need a cookie. Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
Gene,
It's a great topic. Wish I'd thought of it! Diana "Gene Schurg" wrote in message thlink.net... I agree with what you all have said about crossing the parents and "trying" to create your own but you probably won't get identical results. There are people out there dedicating their lives to creating that special orchid with a particular feature and someone may create the first big blue phal or paph rothchildianum with 20 flowers or whatever someone else dreams up. I chose phals for my example because you can clone a bizillion of them using current asexual techniques. I just thought this would make some good conversation while we wait for the orchids to grow. Gene |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
I am not a fan of plant patenting, but it is a necessary thing these days.
Mericloning has been around a long time, but it is only in the past 10-15 years that a problem has arisen. The problem is largely related to Far East commercial growers buying divisions of top plants, cloning them in quick time, and then flooding the market before the owner of the original plant has a chance to make a profit- or perhaps the owner did NOT want the plant cloned at all. Sometimes it is worse. More than once a new shoot off a plant has mysteriously "disappeared" from a show plant that wins an award... This is not a condemnation of the Far East- it happens here too. But orchids are big business now and old unspoken rules of good spirit and fairness no longer apply. The fact that most mass orchid production takes place in the Far East is why the main issue can be traced there. Some nurseries have disregarded US patents knowing the international reach to prosecute is not practical, but such places are few and far between. Noone is going to bother prosecuting those who sell divisions or keikeis. Anyone who did would quickly be out of business as the orchid world turned a cold shoulder- but perhaps not as the mass market becomes where the money is. Still, that is not the intent of patenting. The intent is to protect the value of mass cloning and that is fair. Breeders may wait years between FCCs or breakthrough plants. 2,000 clones x $30 each is big bucks. The growers have a right to protect their ability to cash in on that as the originator of the plant. I do not like patents because they are a reminder that too many people build collections on the successful plants of others and they are also a reminder that "doing the right thing" has been replaced by "doing the legal thing", but so be it. Tom. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
Larry,
I am not thaaaaat old. Mick |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Plant patents
Patents exist for financial protection. Period.
There is nothing to stop you from propagating a patented plant, just as there is nothing to stop you from duplicating a patented piece of equipment, chemical, etc. There IS, however, the law to stop you from distributing same. Doing so - through sales, trades, or simple giveaways - has a financial impact on the patent holder, so is a no-no. Patent or not, once you own something, you may do with it what you will, such as cloning the patented plant. Of course, one might wonder what you're going to do with those thousands of duplicates, as they basically must remain yours. -- Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info! .. . . . . . . . . . . "Gene Schurg" wrote in message rthlink.net... Recently I've seen a couple of phals with "vegetative propagation prohibited" printed on the name tag. I know that some major corporations are filing for plant patents. I hear about this more when they have "Genetically altered Corn" or other major cash crops. I'd like to have a discussion here about plant patents and orchids. Is it fair that I spend my time and selective breeding to create a navy blue phalanopsis and get all kinds of awards on it only to sell a clone of it and have someone else make a thousand copies? If I pay my good money for a plant don't I have some rights to make copies of it? What if it sends out a keiki on its own? Do I have to destroy that keiki? Would I go to jail if I sell that keiki? I'm sure there are some opinions on this topic out there in Orchid Land. Good Growing, Gene |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
sweet--not scotch broom--to plant or not to plant? | Gardening | |||
Full Plant Pics--was (What type of Plant is this can anyone tell | Gardening | |||
how much plant is too much plant for fish at night? | Freshwater Aquaria Plants |