Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - Re: [NAFEX] Moral and Legal Patent Quandries (Warning: political diatribe--delete if not interested; -)

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "loneroc" <loneroc@mwt.net>
  • To: "North American Fruit Explorers" <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [NAFEX] Moral and Legal Patent Quandries (Warning: political diatribe--delete if not interested; -)
  • Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 06:03:17 -0600

Jerry,

First, Mike Levine brings up some of my concerns about the plant patent
system, as it stands, very well. I probably wouldn't object to plant
patents per se were they granted to a specific plant. If we were only
letting honest individual businesspersons reap the reward due them for their
efforts I'd be cool with that. My biggest problem with the patent system is
how it's being used as a weapon in corporate attempts to concentrate or
monopolize agricultural power. If I were controlling Monsanto-Seminis and
wanted to expand my power I'd put a patented, engineered gene into all my
corn seed--then sue anyone who had the gall to "steal" my creation by
actually allowing their corn plants to receive pollen from mine. Oh gosh, I
forgot--they're already doing this.

Second, (and I only bring this up in response to a political point you made,
Jerry) please don't buy into the Party line that the only alternative to
monopoly and oligarchy is "socialism". (The former CCCP is more accurately
described as Leninist anyway.) Democratic capitalism, in its political and
economic sense, is the system I espouse. The capitalist system (in the
broadest sense) is superior in every measurable sense to the old Soviet
system. A fully functioning capitalist system depends on the rule of law,
and one can arbitrarily write those laws to favor almost any particular
group without disrupting the essentially capitalist nature of the system.
(Campaign contribution anyone?) It is not 'socialistic' to structure the
rules in a way that prevents the concentration of economic power and wealth
in the hands of the few, or the one. The accusation of "socialism" has
stymied most attempts at economic change in the United States for the last
sixty years. In the same way that the former Soviet Union's ideological
blinders slowed the rational acceptance of the superiority of the Western
capitalist economic system, the US suffers from the same sort of hangover
from the Cold War. All one has to do to stop an economic discussion or
discredit the messenger an issue (who might, say, want to attempt to reign
in the abuses of an economic elite, or want to join the rest of the
industrialized world in providing universal health care) is to toss the
epithet "socialism" into the picture--an accusation tantamount to treason
during and since the Cold War. US ideology also holds that the private
sector is always more efficient than the government in a given activity.
This is objectively false is some cases. Health care comes to mind--
because of ideological blindness the US has the highest health care costs
in the world--yeah, some folks get great care, but it can be done for less
without the 23% mark-up for the "administrative" costs of "competing"
private insurance providers. Medicare drug benefits anyone?

Perhaps because of my upbringing outside the US, the closed nature of
American popular political thought jumps out at me. Thought-stifling
verbiage is not just a product of the US right wing--the Left has its own
verbal weapons to squelch dialogue. "Racism" is one that comes to mind.
But Leftist ideology does not appear to be driving the revisions of patent
practice underway without any real national discussion about their impact
on our future. The decisions that have changed the fundamental scope of
biological patent law are being done administratively or judicially in most
cases, with no input from Congress--hey, no need for campaign contributions.
Where are the Right's objections to "activist judges" on this issue. I
don't mind having rules--they are necessary, but if I believe that a law, as
it stands, is immoral, I'm not going to snitch on violators, even if I have
no intention on violating the law myself.

With apologies to those who have no interest in a topic only marginally
related to fruit exploration, though you were warned in the subject line,

Steve H.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Levine" <mlevine@umich.edu>
To: <breen@fedcoseeds.com>; "North American Fruit Explorers"
<nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: [NAFEX] Moral and Legal Patent Quandries


> I have some questions about moral and legal patent issues also. If a gene
> is inserted into a plant and patented, but the plant is one that can
easily
> spread across property lines or can spread it's pollen across property
> lines, is the progeny of that plant protected by patent law?
>
> If I genetically modify and patent a strawberry and it spreads to your
> property, are you violating my patent rights? What if you plant seed from
> that strawberry on your property and it contains my patented gene, are you
> violating my rights? What if an animal vector plants it?
>
> What if my plant becomes a serious nuisance weed on your farm, resulting
in
> lower crop yields and increased labor or other costs? Can you sue me?
>
> What about if my genetic experiment crosses with seed you've been saving
for
> your breeding project and now you can't use the stock from your breeding
> project because I own a patent on a gene that contaminated your stock?
>
> What about if my genetic experiment crosses with seed you use on your
> organic farm without your permission? Can you still sell the produce as
> organic? Can you sue me?
>
>
> Mike Levine
> Ann Arbor, MI zone 5b
>
> _______________________________________________
> nafex mailing list
> nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
>
> Reproduction of list messages or archives is not allowed.
> This includes distribution on other email lists or reproduction on web
sites.
> Permission to reproduce is NEVER granted, so don't claim you have
permission!
>
> **YOU MUST BE SUBSCRIBED TO POST!**
> Posts from email addresses that are not subscribed are discarded.
> No exceptions.
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, go to the bottom of this page (also can be
used to change other email options):
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/nafex
>
> File attachments are NOT stripped by this list.
> TAKE STEPS TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM COMPUTER VIRUSES!
> Please do not send binary files.
> Use plain text ONLY in emails!
>
> NAFEX web site: http://www.nafex.org/
>





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page