Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - Re: [NAFEX] Response to Heron's message of 02/17/06

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Dennis Norton" <dmnorton@royaloakfarmorchard.com>
  • To: "North American Fruit Explorers" <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [NAFEX] Response to Heron's message of 02/17/06
  • Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:27:07 -0600


I guess I'll throw my 2 cents worth in on this issue of "Patent " infringement.  After having operated a successful retail operation that sold music for 13 years, I can identify with the infringement situation.  Music and videos are probably the most abused "copyrighted"  material out there.  I watched my business grow at a pace of 20% per year form 1992 to 1997.  The advent of the internet really got started with consumers in 1995 and by 1998, my sales were flat.  By 1999 I saw them dropping by 10% per year.  My music sales suffered from people not paying for their music.  As more and more people began downloading music, less and less music was being sold by "independent retailers" and more was being sold by the "bog box" stores at deep discounts to compete for the same dollar that was shrinking.  I sold my business in 2003 and became an apple grower with the rest of my family.  "Copyright infringement" changed the way music is sold today.   The law states that you cannot make a copy of a CD period.  You cannot make a copy of anything that is copyrighted for any reason unless granted permission by the copyrighter.  Patent laws are the same.  
 
I appreciate the attitude that one would gladly pay the researcher their due if they knew where to send it.     If NAFEX and other groups and providers of rootstocks are in a position to help breeders recover fees that are due to them, then I suggest NAFEX provide a way to get payment to the breeder.  Maybe NAFEX should create an umbrella organization like CCLI has for churches that copy church music all the time for their choirs and services.  A church pays a fee to CCLI and are given a CCLI account number for reporting what they have copied.  Go to  http://www.ccli.com/whoarewe/CopyrightLicense.cfm and see how CCLI does it.  The more music you copy, the more you pay annually.  Everybody wins.  If NAFEX did the same sort of thing, we growers and propagators would be able to pay the folks who deserve to get paid and everybody wins.  just thought I would throw my 2 cents in.  As a grower, we pay royalties on the trees we purchase and do not propagate from any stock that is patented, since we, like everyone else, would not know who to pay.  A central clearing organization of system would solve this and I think in the long run would enhance the propagation of new varieties.  Especially if all necessary information was being reported to a central location.
   
Dennis Norton
Royal Oak Farm Orchard
http://www.royaloakfarmorchard.com
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 3:07 PM
Subject: [NAFEX] Response to Heron's message of 02/17/06

 
 

This is a response to Herons message of 2/17/06

 

I agree with most of what Heron wrote, I admit that I did not fully understand all of it. I think that I, and probably most of the participants of this group agree the basic premise is true and that few of us would avoid paying the royalty for the use of new selections. That said, I am not willing to buy, in the beginning, all the trees that I might want to grow. There a several reasons for this, I want to see how this selection performs here, I may want to change the rootstock and since taste is a very subjective characteristic, I want to know how it suits me and my use. I have never seen a catalog presentation that said “this is a mediocre selection but you may like it”. The description always says that this is the greatest. Some catalog offerings indicate that the selection is a patented variety, but says nothing about any restrictions regarding propagation. The “patented” is more often a sales pitch that implies that this is a very good selection and you should have it.

 

If I decide that I want to grow more of this selection, I would rather graft it onto rootstocks of my choice and number and send “X” number of dollars to the researcher or breeder that produced the selection, not to the propagator who expanded the selection. The royalty should go to the breeder and if sent to anyone else, I doubt that it would get where it should go. 

 

I suspect that many of you on this list would send “X” number of dollars to the breeder if you knew how or where to send it. We are much more cognizant of what it takes to produce a new selection. Most of the consumers that buy these plants do not have a clue what that “Patent” means.

 

NAFEX and other groups and providers of rootstocks are in a position to help breeders recover fees that are due to them if, we as a group or organization, knew the best way to send these funds to the breeder. We often run workshops teaching budding and grafting and other forms of propagation, therefore we should be able to also teach a bit of ethics and how to compensate the breeders. This should be a part of every grafting workshop and of every extension office in the country.

 

I am not opposed to paying the fees, I just need to know who to pay them to.

 

 

 

 
Ed Mashburn
Central PA
Zone 5A



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page