
Monsanto: All Your Seeds Are Belong to Us - napolux
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/02/scotus-hears-monsanto-soybean-case
======
mtgx
Are we really going to enter an era of "seed piracy"? And not because farmers
everywhere would intentionally steal Monsanto's seeds, but because the laws
would change in such a way that almost everyone else' seeds would be
considered "pirated" versions of Monsanto's seeds.

Maybe we'll even get some kind of seed DMCA in the future. If Monsanto accuses
someone of pirating, the government would just seize those crops. No trial
necessary.

~~~
Ygg2
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Your message seem like its coming from
15 minutes into the future.

------
CaptainZapp
This is exactly the reason why I strongly oppose GM food.

It's not that I'm scared about the consequences (the jury's still out on
that).

But, do you really want to hand the keys for our nutrition to the likes of
Monsanto, Syngenta and their ilk?

~~~
penny500
Why not? Their seeds and their competitors' are shown to be perfectly safe by
the FDA, and the National Academy of Sciences and American Medical Association
vouch for their seeds.

~~~
marquis
It's not about safety, it's about ownership. This quote from the Judge: "Why
in the world would anybody spend any money to try to improve the seed if as
soon as they sold the first one anybody could grow more and have as many of
those seeds as they want?" - the part about "anyone could grow more and have
as many seeds as they want" pretty much sums up farming as we've known it
since agriculture began.

Edit: yes, I'm aware of that most farmers don't actually store their own seed
for next year for efficiency of another farmer/company providing high-quality
seeds yearly for them, however this is not justifying Monsanto's methods.
There must be limits on food patents. I simply don't believe Monsanto cannot
recover costs on the first-sale of seeds.

~~~
lazyjones
> Why in the world would anybody spend any money to try to improve the seed

There was a time when some people actually invented things to make the world a
better place, or even to further their academic career. With the help of such
judges, this era has apparently come to an end. We will never beat famine,
we'll just help the plagued 3rd world become 100% dependent on the likes of
Monsanto.

~~~
penny500
We've already beat famine. Aside rebel-controlled areas, can you name the last
famine?

~~~
crymer11
Using the UN's defintion of famine as "at least 20 per cent of households in
an area face extreme food shortages with a limited ability to cope; acute
malnutrition rates exceed 30 per cent; and the death rate exceeds two persons
per day per 10,000 persons." [1]

Not including Somolia in 2011 (which the UN did declare a famine), "...
famines have been declared previously in southern areas of Sudan in 2008; in
Gode in the Somali region of Ethiopia in 2000; in the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea (DPRK) in 1996; in Somalia in 1991-1992, and Ethiopia in
1984-1985." [1]

[http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39113#.UWW2dKtA...](http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39113#.UWW2dKtAT3I)

------
jayfuerstenberg
AVAAZ is hosting a petition against Monsanto's attempt to patent food in
Europe right now:
[http://www.avaaz.org/en/monsanto_vs_mother_earth_loc/?cwqgMd...](http://www.avaaz.org/en/monsanto_vs_mother_earth_loc/?cwqgMdb)

If you care about the health of everybody's food and the environment in
general please sign it.

------
Svip
Makes you wonder why Monsanto aren't considered the Worst Company in the
United States. For my money, I find BP and oil companies as well as the banks
incompetent but with a bit of malice.

Monsanto, on the other hand, are pure evil.

~~~
penny500
Helping farmers increase their yield, which makes food cheaper for the poor,
is "pure evil"?

~~~
stagas
The argument "making food cheaper for the poor" doesn't give you a pass
messing with nature and people's health. I can make food cheaper by killing
half of the population since there's going to be more left for the rest of us!
Does this justify my action?

Get real, food has grown and can grow naturally and there are natural ways to
have healthy crops that don't need dangerous pesticides. Nature has been
working in a balance since ever and they are messing with it. It's MY nature
they are messing with. All they're doing is maximizing profits at the expense
of everything and everybody else.

~~~
randomdata
> food has grown and can grow naturally

It most certainly can, but it hasn't for tens of thousands of years. People
have been genetically modifying food and growing it in non-natural ways for as
long as we have had agriculture.

If we could somehow turn to clocks back to a pre-agriculture food supply, do
you feel that it would be viable to keep the current human population alive?
Keep in mind that the crops we grow today didn't even exist back then, and
only came to exist through thousands of years of genetic modifications.

~~~
stagas
No they didn't. Genetic modification is not the same thing as crossbreeding.
And what they did always happened with regards and love for the environment.
They produced crops that brought balance and harmony in nature so they always
had fresh and healthy food. They didn't use artificial fertilizers or
pesticides nor they messed with the DNA sequence manually for shady purposes.

Have you seen a goat or sheep eating its way through a field of weed? They eat
and poop at the same time as they move around. That's an example of a natural
fertilizer, cleansing and ploughing tool.

It's the obsession of first-world countries wanting meat every day on the
table. That is unnatural. That is disturbing harmony and that is why we need
chemical pesticides and genetic modifications and that is why these countries
have an excess rate of cancer in comparison to those that still grow food in
their yards naturally.

So stop calling natural agriculture genetic modification. That's an argument
Monsanto and the likes brought to the table to mess with your mind and justify
their cause and is completely invalid.

~~~
randomdata
Okay, let's put it another way. The Dekalb company is 100 years old. They are
in the business of crossbreeding, attempting to produce better traits each
year in the same way famers did thousands of years ago. Do you feel that they
do so with love?

If you answer no, at what point did agriculture lose that love, if more than
100 years ago?

> Have you seen a goat or sheep eating its way through a field of weed?

I have never seen a field of weed with or without animals in it. Such a field
would be illegal in my country. (Sorry, I couldn't resist)

------
tellarin
At least the Supreme Court is hearing the case. Hope they take the right
decision here.

I can't understand how Monsanto can make these claims with a straight face.
The guys didn't license the seeds from them. If much, they could go after
whoever sold the seeds to the grain elevator, but that's also quite a stretch.

Also, what happens if some other regular seed shipment is "contaminated" by
Monsanto seeds in any way? Is a farmer/buyer supposed to have to pay them for
not doing DNA analysis in all seeds? WTF?!

~~~
jayfuerstenberg
Not if Clarence Thomas has anything to say about it.

Monsanto and the FDA are a revolving door for each other and Clarence used to
work for Monsanto.

------
mschuster91
That nature can be patented at all is a gross violation of human rights.

Nature and biology should not be restricted by anything. Ever.

------
Major_Grooves
Monsanto made the roundup-ready soybeans, which took millions to develop. If
the farmer doesn't want to be sued, he could use non-roundup-ready soybeans.

Or, presumably, he can wait till the original patent expires, then he can use
the roundup-ready soybeans freely.

I'm all for calling out unethical companies and IP trolls, but unless
companies get to protect real IP that they develop themselves, what's the
point in developing anything.

~~~
CaptainZapp
> I'm all for calling out unethical companies and IP trolls

In terms of unethical Monsanto is in the absolute top league. This is a
company, which positively can be described as evil.

I suggest you do some reading up about this company.

~~~
penny500
I love the claims for calling this company "evil" with absolutely no
scientific proof given. I thought we were supposed to be believers in science
and due process.

~~~
dfxm12
This is one example, taken from the Food, Inc. documentary.

The parent topic asks, _Monsanto made the roundup-ready soybeans, which took
millions to develop. If the farmer doesn't want to be sued, he could use non-
roundup-ready soybeans._

In the documentary, they profile a farmer who got sued by Monsanto for not
paying their license. The farmer claimed he was _not_ using Monsanto seeds.
However, Monsanto's argument amounted to "We are the largest seller of these
seeds in the world, therefor, it must be our seed. Even though you can prove
it isn't, you must have "washed" the seed to make it seem like it isn't ours,
or maybe some of your neighbor's Monsanto seed blew into your land and you owe
us for that too."

The judge sided with Monsanto.

Yes, this shows our legal system is evil for letting them get away with this,
but the fact that Monsanto is driving around & actively looking for farmers
who aren't using their seed, extorting them for not & dragging them into a
court battle they know will bankrupt them is evil too.

For further viewing, check the Monsanto Food Inc. clips. They are on YouTube.
Mansanto has also responded on their website.

------
cageface
I live in Vietnam and almost every day I see the heartbreaking consequences of
Monsanto's involvement in the dioxin poisoning of this country. As far as I'm
concerned this company should be liquidated and the proceeds distributed to
the people still suffering every day as a result.

Putting the future of agriculture in the hands of a company this immoral is
simply insane.

------
seanalltogether
If monsanto holds the patent on the pesticide, why do they need a patent on
the seed as well? Isn't it in the best interest to proliferate the seed as
much as possible to maximize the number of farmers who need the pesticide?

~~~
randomdata
Patents expire. Companies need to continue to innovate if they want to stay
relevant.

The last Roundup-related patent expired, according to Wikipedia, in 2000. Even
the Roundup Ready 1 modified seed patent expires next year.

------
TOGoS
"It would be near impossible to recoup your investments with that first sale,
and so the more likely consequence is that research dollars would be put
elsewhere,"

Great! Fuck Monsanto's investments and their fucking poison.

~~~
Joe-Z
I don't get this either. Also from the article:

"Why in the world would anybody spend any money to try to improve the seed if
as soon as they sold the first one anybody could grow more and have as many of
those seeds as they want?"

If the flaws in their business model are so obvious (i.e. farmers can reuse
their product once they bought it), why don't they try to improve their
business model instead of threatening farmers with lawsuits and trying to
regulate the food industry?

------
stagas
Can we identify the products on the shelves that are of Monsanto origin and
have a list posted somewhere so we can boycott them? I don't really feel like
ever buying anything originated from that company.

~~~
maceo
This app makes it easy to do just that:
<http://buycott.com/campaign/211/demand-gmo-labeling>

~~~
stagas
That's a good cause but will take ages before all nations adopt it, if they
ever get everyone to agree. I was hoping for something I can start using right
away.

~~~
maceo
You can use it right away. Download the iPhone app at
[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/buycott/id585933440?ls=1&...](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/buycott/id585933440?ls=1&mt=8),
join that campaign I linked to, and then use it to scan a barcode to find out
if an item is owned by Monsanto.

By the way, I believe that US and Canada are the only developed nations that
don't already require GMO labeling.

------
Bryan22
2 pop ups in 3 seconds. Monsanto is evil everyone gets it. Not to mention the
recent political scandal... but I'm not reading the article. Pop-ups are
equally evil.

~~~
milfot
If the pop-ups infect your computer and write spurious code into all your
saved work thereby taking ownership of them and then sue your sorry arse into
the ground for theft.. then yes, pop-ups are equally evil.

~~~
Bryan22
If pop ups increased the amount of data my hard drive could store they'd be
equally good... Monsanto is an evil corporation but GMOs are pretty much the
only reason there's going to be enough food for "your sorry arse" to eat in 10
years. The farmers have to pay for the seeds, yes, but their yield is much
higher than without them. Sounds like the guy knew what he was doing when he
bought the second hand seeds. Why don't you spend billions of dollars on a
piece of software, sell it to me cheap and allow me to sell knock offs for 1/2
your asking price; lets see how you feel about it then...

~~~
milfot
First, my comment was facetiously poking fun at the idea of some benign first-
world annoyance being evil.. lighten up eh?

Second, the argument about GMO (or any other high-tech way to increase farming
yields) being a 'solution' to food supply shortages is thrown around a lot
without any evidence.. nor, as far as I can see, any actual basis in fact.

The drive to increase yields is a drive to increase profit / hectare, which
has only resulted in actually driving other farmers out of the business which
reduces food production stability, and ultimately overall yield. In every
objective measure, this process also produces inferior product.

Monsanto has been profiting from the large-scale destruction of many decades
of careful seed adaptation in regional areas. They have driven seed sellers
and savers out of business in order to monopolise the markets. They sue /
threaten / cajole farmers into using their product or effectively run them out
of business.

Third, if I spent billions creating a piece of software whose sole purpose was
to replicate its source code and upload it randomly to surrounding networks
(along with some by-product) _and_ did this by only changing a couple of lines
in an existing piece of open source code, so that no one could really tell the
difference... and got pissed that people were using that code. Well, I would
just be a bit of a dick now, wouldn't I.

Spending more money on something does not give you any more rights, just more
risk.

------
kokey
Patents on seeds and breeds have been around for many decades before Monsanto
came to the party. Farmers tend not to replant seeds for a very long time now,
not only to avoid patent disputes but also to ensure consistency of crops.
It's only become viable now to DNA test seeds and breeds to protect these
patents.

------
jaramburu
It is so profitable to be evil

------
OGinparadise
_"Monsanto: All Your Seeds Are Belong to Us"_

Mother Jones: All Articles Written by Us Are Belong to Us

I understand the impact on farmers and that Monsanto plays dirty, but this is
their invention, you do not have to use their seeds. If you do, however, you
must play by their rules. I understand that the lawsuit is different (planted
someone else's seeds) but that person also violated his agreement.

 _"They want the farmers to take all the risks associated with farming, yet
they want to control how they use those seeds all the way down the
distribution chain,"_

So it's an unfair agreement. Don't enter it.

~~~
makomk
The point is that you do have to use their seeds. Previously you could get
seeds from other sources or even replant your own seeds, but Monsanto have
been suing seed cleaning firms and people who buy seeds elsewhere, which means
that even if you don't want Roundup Ready seeds you have to buy them from
Monsanto.

------
LatvjuAvs
And people are happy when you pour more poison on plants and they are fine :D

