Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

market-farming - Re: Monsanto vs Schmeiser

market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Market Farming

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Kevin Ancell" <kancell AT goodearthgardens.com>
  • To: "Market Farming" <market-farming AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Monsanto vs Schmeiser
  • Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 06:32:11 -0500


Taken from http://www.percyschmeiser.com/decision.htm
Schmeiser maintained through the trial that he didn't want their product in
his fields and produced evidence that he did not take advantage of the
technology as he did not spray his fields with Round up. He also charged
Monsanto with contaminating his canola seed that he had developed over 40
years of being a conventional canola grower.

HERE"S the decision: http://www.percyschmeiser.com/T1593-98-%20Decision.pdf
which clearly states that Mr. Schmeiser did spray his field with round-up
then saved the seeds and segragated them to keep the round-up ready
properties seperate from his conventional Canola.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Weather you are GMO - Pro or Con the fact remains that patent and copyright
laws must be up held. Without them innovation would be a thing of the past!


----- Original Message -----
From: Bev and Chuck Henkel <bchenkel AT conpoint.com>

> > You have heard about the ruling on the Monsanto vs Percy Schmeiser
>> case in Canada, yes?
>
> The judge's 62 page summary of the case is on the web. It seems Percy
> Schmeiser sprayed 3 to 4 acres of his canola with roundup and then saved
the
> seed from the plants that survived and planted them the next year. So
> unfortunately this isn't the cleanest incident to have as a test case.
But
> the judge's comments are alarming.








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page