Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Biotech Government Patents The Courts News

Monsanto Wins Case Over Patented Canola 599

c writes "The Supreme Court of Canada says that you're liable if a plant with a patented gene infects your property. If you recall, Schmeiser claims (and research supports) that Roundup Ready canola seeds infected his own crops. Monsanto prosecuted him for patent infringement." Some other links: Monsanto's press release, Globe and Mail story.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Monsanto Wins Case Over Patented Canola

Comments Filter:
  • by Allen Zadr ( 767458 ) * <Allen.Zadr@g m a i l . com> on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:33PM (#9219879) Journal

    I would have thought that genetically modified crops would be unable to reproduce by some manipulation. I'm quite surprised to hear from the articles and research linked that this is not the case.

    I imagine the purists who want full organic food may be surprised that thier food may be cross-polinated with a genetic crop.

  • Wait a minute... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Punboy ( 737239 ) * on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:36PM (#9219911) Homepage
    Shouldn't this situation be reversed? The defendant should sue the other guy for damaging his crops!
  • by macmaniac ( 734596 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:38PM (#9219938) Homepage
    I would have thought that genetically modified crops would be unable to reproduce by some manipulation. I'm quite surprised to hear from the articles and research linked that this is not the case.
    They may be modified somewhat, but in order to make it so that crops would not reproduce, you would probably have to create an entirely new method for them to bear fruit or whatever crop they use, since this process is naturally cared for by pollenization, part of the reproductive process of most plants.... Even if they managed to produce such a modification, since they were created/modified by humans, error is inevitable, like what happened in the movie Jurassic Park.
  • by zentinal ( 602572 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:40PM (#9219964) Homepage
    Would it be legal for someone to come up with a material that only kills Roundup Ready©® plants?
  • Well (Score:3, Interesting)

    by abe ferlman ( 205607 ) <bgtrio@ya[ ].com ['hoo' in gap]> on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:41PM (#9219973) Homepage Journal
    Can't move to Canada now if Bush is reelected. Is Russia really the land of the free now? allofmp3.com hasn't been shut down yet.
  • "Organic" crops (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Colin Smith ( 2679 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:42PM (#9219988)
    Farmers in the UK are going to have to be very careful over this one. "Organically" produced crops have a premium price here and one of the requirements to be classified as organic is no GM. If a neighbouring farmer's GM crop gets into an organic farmer's crop, there could well be financial penalties if the source of the contamination can be proven.

  • Offspring licencing (Score:5, Interesting)

    by manganese4 ( 726568 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:45PM (#9220020)
    So if we ever get to the point of inserting modfied DNA into the human genome to "cure" mutations that exist in family lines, will parents have to pay royalties in order to have children? Will it be on a child by child basis or will it be based on the number of attempts at insemmination? If you have a low sperm or egg count, will you get a discount?
  • by bear_phillips ( 165929 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:46PM (#9220030) Homepage
    f anything, the burden should be placed on the farmers using the licensed seeds to control their plants

    I would guess that Schmeiser could sue the other farm that let the seeds blow onto his crops. The "pollution" of his fields caused him an economic damage. He cant use the seeds now because he is not licensed. In Texas,Kansas etc farmers get paid if an oil line spills onto their crop, I don't see how "seed pollution" should be any different.

  • Time To Go Organic (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:46PM (#9220039)
    Now seems like a time to go organic and provide subsidies for it, rather than providing them for over producing then paying again to store the over produced foodstuffs.

    This ruling is crazy and I hope it is overturned. Monsanto are evil for even taking this to court. It's like saying Iraqies are responsible for Americans going into Iraq. The person who sent them in is responsible in that case, and in this case the planting farmer should be responsible.
    Even better, the tampering scum that create GM crops should be responsible for their abominations.

    Rant over, so feel free to flame me to a crisp.
  • by mcg1969 ( 237263 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:52PM (#9220100)
    One important tidbit from this story that the poster failed to mention was that this ruling also eliminated the payment of damages, because the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant received any additional profit as a result of the use of the patented seeds.

    I quote: Since there was no evidence that he sprayed Roundup herbicide to reduce the weeks [sic], the majority said, there is no way to conclude that he gained any financial advantage.
  • by zogger ( 617870 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:54PM (#9220132) Homepage Journal
    ..what we are surpirsed is that 99% of the population has no clue about the food they eat other than it comes from the supermarket automagically.

    We've been lobbying against this stuff for years, for that very reason, it infects our stuff, and then they claim ownership? Huh? Howzzat again?

    Just wait. If you are just hearing about roundup ready and cross pollination and infection, wait to you hear about terminator genes and cross pollination. Ohh, that's a goody. Makes a plant live one year, then all it's offspring is infertile. Think on that one for a bit. Think about the winds, how they cross borders, let alone mere fields and counties. Give it a few years once they start using that sort of seed, you'll have one company "owning" the planets food supply, then their stuff will get borken and--not much food at all. It very easily could happen, you aren't stopping the wind.

    Lotta groovy short term profits though, until that happens.

    After that, can't say. Most likely world class famine at a minimum.
  • Re:Low flying plane (Score:4, Interesting)

    by easter1916 ( 452058 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:55PM (#9220146) Homepage
    I contracted at Monsanto for a few years in Grower Marketing Programs (http://www.fuelyourprofits.com is an example of a project I worked on). To get those seeds, you have to sign a contract with Monsanto, and you would be screwed if you used them in a manner inconsistent with your contractual obligation.
  • by Allen Zadr ( 767458 ) * <Allen.Zadr@g m a i l . com> on Friday May 21, 2004 @04:56PM (#9220156) Journal
    If you click the "research supports this" link, you'll see what I'm referring to. Basically, a whole bunch of supposedly "pure" crops came up as round-up resistant.

    Really interesting read.

  • No wonder Monsanto sued. They're pi^h^h upset that he didn't buy the matching 55-gallon drums of Roundup. They couldn't have cared less if the guy used the patented seed -- they'd probably give it away for free if they could force the recipients to use their also-patented herbicide.

    Careful - Monsanto might sue you for revealing their marketing plan without proper authority! But seriously, Gillette figured this out years ago - they money's in selling the razor blades, not the razors.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:06PM (#9220262)
    Or we could declare that all plants and animals produced before 1985 are Natural (as though Noah had Holstein cows on the ark) and everything else is Frankenfood, from which we must recoil in terror. Outside of North America, that seems to be the case.

    The argument that GM is okay because "it's only the same thing as selective breeding" is nonsense. Know any scientists who can get mice to breed with jellyfish? Nope, me neither. Maybe those glow-in-the-dark mice are something new that wasn't possible before, then? Yup, I think everyone agrees on that.

    Therefore GM technology is not merely a quicker form of selective breeding, it can make changes far more drastic than are possible with traditional genetic tinkering.

    Therefore it is not inconceivable that GM tech could introduce changes which prove much more harmful to humans or the environment.

    Therefore it is not "pure superstition" to ask why GM crops are being railroaded into mass production while scientists still don't agree on what the cross-pollenation risks really are.

    Please point out any flaws in my logic.
  • This makes no sense (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:07PM (#9220270)
    Doesn't this place Canada's canola industry in dire jeopardy?

    Suppose some "radical" activist takes a bunch of patent-encumbered seeds and drops them from an airplane on all the canola fields in Canada. Now, every farm owes massive royalties to Monsanto. There are three possible resolutions to this situation: 1) Monsanto doesn't try to collect (improbable); 2) Monsanto tries to collect and bankrupts every farm in Canada, ruining the entire industry; 3) Monsanto tries to collect, and Canada is forced to provide a subsidy to pay for the settlements, in order to preserve the canola industry.

    In any case, the whole deal would be completely fucked. It appears that Canada has just massively shot itself in the foot.

    So, anybody got an airplane I can borrow?

  • by the_2nd_coming ( 444906 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:09PM (#9220288) Homepage
    no, salt works better.

    we had this crazy bamboo that a moron brought back from Brazil 50 years ago that was running amok in the ally, nothing killed it, gasoline, diesel fuel, plowing it under, finally, I bought 20 bags of rock salt and dumped them all over the area and plowed the salt into the soil.... I have not seen a single bamboo shoot for 3 years.
  • by Colin Smith ( 2679 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:12PM (#9220325)
    All you need is a field or playing field full of dandelions. Spray 80% of it with Roundup each year, covering a different 80% each year. Leave enough behind to allow the dandelions and other weeds to repopulate the field.

    A few years of that and tada... Roundup resistant dandelions. It'd only cost $50 per year for 5-10 years. How much did Monsanto spend on research trying for the same effect?

    Once you have the field of resistant weeds, harvest some of it and go visit Monsanto and offer to sell them your "high tech" dandelions for research purposes.

  • by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:13PM (#9220329) Homepage Journal
    Just manipulating DNA in things does NOT automatically render them sterile as far as reproduction goes. This is what does lend danger to the man made stuff mixing into the natural crops. A real possibility, I would guess, is that long term, we might lose the 'real thing' having been contaminated by the man altered stuff.

    Heck, we have lots of crops that really aren't available today...if not for people dedicated to protecting 'heirloom' vegetables. Notice how tomatoes nowdays pretty much have no flavor, but, are nice and uniform in color and size?

    I went to a farm up north just outside of NH last year where they specialize in heirloom tomatoes. Man, I'd forgotten what they used to really taste like in my youth...and the different colored ones...some with yellow, tiger striped ones, purple ones....and many in non uniform shapes and sizes. But, flavor was the MAIN thing that stood out on these...

    I really used to think the 'organic' foods movement was pretty much a crock...but, this started me thinking a little different...

  • by neurojab ( 15737 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:14PM (#9220341)
    >Roundup Ready canola seeds

    FYI... There is no such thing as a canola plant or, by extension, canola seeds.

    The term "canola" is a bastardization of "Canadian Oil", used by canadian growers in place of the less consumer-friendly name of the actual crop "rapeseed". The crop isn't refered to as canola until the oil is extracted.

    So what you have here is "Roundup Ready Rapeseed", which sort of rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:20PM (#9220397)
    actually, this is quite possible.
    A former teacher of mine devised a method for making male-sterile corn (Zea mays).
    You can play around with this of course. You can, for instance, make two lines. And that only if you combine them, the offspring is sterile. This way, you (ie, big evil company) can make seeds, while you sell only seeds/plants that are sterile. So that a farmer cannot use the plants you sold him to continue breeding.

    Come to think of it. It's rather similar to owning legal movies/music/software, which you cannot copy, or improve...

  • by eric76 ( 679787 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:20PM (#9220402)
    It's not only seeds of bioengineered plants.

    With many proprietary seeds, you are not permitted to save some of the harvested crop and plant them the next year unless you have the permission of the company owning those rights.

    Do a web search on "Plant Variety Protection Act"

  • by Stinky Cheese Man ( 548499 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:22PM (#9220423)
    > If the consumer marketplace ends up with genetically modified apples that aren't intentionally seedless, then who knows where those apple seeds might wind up.

    An interesting thing I learned from reading Michael Pollan's "The Botany of Desire" is that apples have a high degree of genetic variation and never come true from seed. If you plant 10 Red Delicious seeds, you will not get 10 Red Delicious apple trees. You will get 10 very different plants, none of which resemble the parent. As I understand it, commercial apples are never propagated by seed - only by cuttings from the parent plant. (Not disagreeing with you - just adding an observation.)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:32PM (#9220533)
    Can you link to WTF you are talking about in your sig?
  • by budgenator ( 254554 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:43PM (#9220639) Journal
    I've been following this story a while and in previous stories Schmeiser is reported to have been growing heirloom crops also. Heirloom crops are fast disapearing but are important because they provide a genetic baseline that agricultural scientist can use to "start from scratch" occasonaly.

    I under stand that if you found the original pre-indian corn, it would be worth millions.
  • by Archfeld ( 6757 ) * <treboreel@live.com> on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:43PM (#9220649) Journal
    I think that was the 'real' heart of case. Farmer Cannuck claimed it blew onto his property and then spread, Corporate Monsanto claimed the volume of growth FAR exceeded what could be reasonably explained as 'normal' spread, the court apparently supported Monsanto. If this ruling holds, I would declare my farm a gene-mod free, wholly organic zone and then be ready to file as soon as a single grain was discovered. Funny but the US has been fed gene mod corn, and Bovine Growth Hormone for nearly a dozen years now, the FDA, in its infinite wisdom, decided it was so safe the consuming public did not even have to be notified. I recall seeing a small dairy concern being sued and losing, or settling for advertising GBH free on their product. Coincidence that 10 year old girls have C cup's now ? I think not...
  • by budgenator ( 254554 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @05:53PM (#9220754) Journal
    Now farmers can't set aside part of their crop for the next season's planting,

    [tin foil hat mode]
    They could as long a black helicopter didn't drop patented seeds on their fields durring the night.
    [/tin foil hat mode]
  • by caseih ( 160668 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @06:29PM (#9220991)
    Actually the genes do spread by themselves. Recently we grew a couple of hundred acres of special GMO seed canola (from a different company). When the seed we grew was tested, it was found that the monsanto gene was present in almost 20% of the sample. Bear in mind this is from a cross of 2 pure non-monsanto canola varieties. The Monsanto canola has been grown in our area, but it was over 5 miles away and almost 5 years previous. Yet the gene still persisted somehow. So yes, the genes can move by themselves.

  • by Martin Blank ( 154261 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @06:34PM (#9221028) Homepage Journal
    Girls are reaching puberty at younger ages, but I've seen many a scientific article that have linked this more closely with nutrition being improved over the years. However, I've not noticed many 10 year-old girls with C-cups, and I live in SoCal and my girlfriend works at a popular local mall. We've been in skinfest season for about two months now, and short girls with large breasts would be very noticeable.
  • by Punchcardz ( 598335 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @06:38PM (#9221066)
    It should be noted that the reason generic grocery tomatoes suck is not because of genetic engeneering. Heck it isn't even really that the varieties are sold are untasty.

    It is the fact that the darn things are picked green for handling by automation and shipping, only later to be "ripened" by exposure to ethelyne gas.

    The only trouble is that while the ethelyne may reproduce the softening portion of ripening that happens on the vine, it doesn't load up any of the tasty compunds into the tomato that normaly come from the vine during natural ripening.

    And of course, your point about varieties of vegetables is correct. People don't want to go to the grocery store and purchase an unknown, though likely superior, item. They want predictablity. It's why people will go to a new town and get a burger at McDonalds instead of that mom and pop burger joint. McDonalds might be inferior, but it is always a known quantity.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @06:54PM (#9221187)
    Goddamn fucking antichrist monsanto. Now they have not only the govt.(read piece of shit ugly mother fucker, dumbass, pseudochristian KING BUSH and his evil cabinet), but also the Supreme Court in their pocket. God i have a bloody dollar ripped off a 3 year old that i just bludgened...no sorry guess that is Cheney's Halliburton, got mixed up...

    Multinational corporations truly exemplify(ok maybe the bastard abusing military also) what is WRONG WITH AMERICA(a selfish country if there ever was one). They need to be reigned in with tight controls. These GM trials are spreading by cross pollinating upto miles away from plant sites. Pretty soon all of our produce(even organic) with start to have fuckin fish and pig genes in them.

    I FOR ONE AM SICK OF IT AND WILL DO SOMETHING DRASTIC ABOUT IT IF THINGS DONT CHANGE!

    ever watch the ending to Fight Club? GET READY!

    There will be a time when those evil corporatists in power will be fuckin shot with their entrails hung from the powerlines, and their heads put on poles in DC.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @07:52PM (#9221578)
    I get where you're coming from.
    This decision is an outrage no doubt about it.

    It's a symptom of an epidemic of sweeping the world.

    Did you know in Australia we cannot use the name 'Port' to descibe the wine anymore, we must call it 'sweetened fortified wine' because it violates a fucking European patent for christs sakes!

    The whole patent/copyright thing is spinning out of control.
  • by Catbeller ( 118204 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @08:01PM (#9221642) Homepage
    "If your crops are aquiring DNA from neigboring GM crops then it seem difficult to call falt on behalf of the farmer."

    It would be, if this were a sane world. The judge found that the farmer infringed Monsanto's patent -- the cross-pollinated crop the farmer grew is best described by that favorite term of the music industry's defenders: stolen property.

    The seed blew into his fields, crossed with his crops, and he grew "their property".

    "youd think that the seed companies would have a real desire to keep these things sterile... otherwise other people will start to do this to develop their own private strains of GM crops... you cant sue them all... but I suppose you could try"

    They don't want sterile crops. This is a win-win for Monsanto. They can continue to let their "privately owned" genes float on the winds to any field in the world, and it's the world's lookout to discover "Monsanto's" genes embedded in the world's crops. Failure to root out Monsanto's intellectual property will result in an IP lawsuit, with the likely outcome that the sued lose their property to pay damages to Monsanto.

    "for what its worth, my confusion about the source of the seeds came from this quote in the article:

    "Schmeiser argued the canola seed blew onto his property from a nearby farm. He has said the plants "polluted" his fields."

    assuming of course that he isnt simply lying. "

    How could he have "stolen" the genes? How can he lie? The basic facts are not disputed by Monsanto. Monsanto's seed, patented and protected Canadian law, blew into the farmer's field. He grew the crops. Monsanto owns his ass therefore.

    I can't think of any clearer argument for throwing out "genetic patents". This gives Monsanto, or any other genetic "IP" company, the ability to grab land and cash at will.

    There is no provision in the patent law to force Monsanto to stop permitting "their" genes to fly downwind and "contaminate" some else's crops, generating criminals by the thousands.

    There also is no way to stop the seed from blowing around. That's what seeds do!
  • by Dun Malg ( 230075 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @08:45PM (#9221908) Homepage
    I under stand that if you found the original pre-indian corn, it would be worth millions.

    I think they finally "re-bred" early corn. I recall reading something about it a year or so ago. The "ear" is only a few inches long and has only four or five rows of tiny kernals. I believe they narrowed down Teosinte grass as the original ancestor of corn and "bred up" from there, just like the indians did. I wish I could remember where I read that...

  • by mindstrm ( 20013 ) on Saturday May 22, 2004 @02:36AM (#9223539)
    Careful.
    He was not sued for the crops that "blew into his field".

    He was sued for what he did the following year; planting the seed from the geneticly altered crop from the year before. The court decided that he knew, or should have known, that his crop the second year around was monsanto's patented stuff.

Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!

Working...