If you can find that organism without having to sign a contract limiting use of something that didn't exist without high-tech engineering intervention at significant cost, methinks SCOTUS would side with you. He violated a contract, simple.
I can sign a contract to be someone's slave, but that contract isn't valid since it contradicts the law.
We just had a ruling that the first sale doctrine is in fact real for copyrighted items and that they can't be controlled after they were sold once. They're selling an organism that makes copies of itself. The onus is on them to control that by engineering the plant to produce non-fertile seeds. If they can tailor make a plant to resist roundup why can't they make it not produce infringing copies of itself?
Imagine if Hollywood sold DVDs or Blurays that spat out two DVDs after you played and then ejected the movie. And you were required to destroy one of the copies lest you run afoul of their copyright. Wouldn't they get laughed out of court?
