Supreme Court To Hear Monsanto Seed Dispute


#1

Supreme Court To Hear Monsanto Seed Dispute

Corporations should not be in complete control of our food.

The Founding Fathers envisioned patents to be short term, say 5 years, giving the original creator an advantage, then they would expire to allow competition.


#2

Does anyone doubt they’re going to rule in favor of Monsanto?


#3

Sorry but the founders didn’t put that in the Constitution. The LAW governs in this case …and it is clearly in favor of Monsanto’s Property Rights. If you don’t LIKE the LAW…then lobby for change. This is not a constitutional issue.
Of course the meme of corporations in control of our food is silly… of course they are…just as they are in control over our I-phone experience. Difference being…you can’t grow your own I-phone.

Property rights are the cornerstone of liberty. Congress gets to set the limits of patents…the Court will defer to them.


#4

I’m surprised the SCOTUS is even hearing this. What Monsanto is trying to do is control farmer planting. say a soy seed matures but is missed by the thresher, roots again and produces again. Monsanto 's postiton seems to be the new soy crop is null and void. To me Monsanto’s responsibility ends when the crop is READY for harvest. At that point the seed has done the job it was intended for, and as it is ready for harvest Monsanto has no more responsibility for the harvest.


#5

Monsanto wants to monopolize the seeds market. They are researching hybrid vegetables that do not reproduce. That way, EVERYONE must buy seeds each season.
But, that should not be our focus. Rather, the scientific community abroad, is reporting cancers and other conditions affecting everyone’s health, since Monsanto controls 90% of the GMO seeds. Alarming that they claim 2 million deaths as a result of these seeds. I am not sure of that stat, but if true, 70% of corn, grain and soybeans in America, are grown from Genetically Modified Seeds. Genetically Modified crops have been said to slow growth in the second generation, and stop reproduction in the third, of the lab animals studied. If this happens in humans, civilization could be threatened.
Also, the decline in bee populations are causing grief throughout the farming community. Studies are being conducted, and have shown that the decline may be due to GMO. Makes sense that if a seed will only produce inert seeds, then the pollen the bees are getting from GMO crops, is tainted.
France and Russia have already outlawed the seeds, England is starting to outlaw them and Australia is testing whether they will follow suit. Japan, New Zealand, Germany, Ireland, Austria, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Madeira, and Switzerland also banned or restricted GMO crops and/or seeds.
If you don’t grow your own produce, you may wish to rethink.


#6

+1

Monsanto is also fighting GMO labeling. I’m not an anarchist, and I think government should at least make sure companies are honest about what their food is made of. Its basic fraud protection.


#7

Right, this is what is in the Constitution.

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing **for limited Times **to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Monsanto cannot have an eternal patent on seeds that reproduce.

I know this probably won’t be the argument made, but I would make it.


#8

The biggest problem here is that Monsanto claims ownership of the plants that are the byproduct of pollination. So if one farmer plants regular seeds and his neighbor plants Monsanto GM seeds, and they cross pollinate, Monsanto will claim ownership of the seeds and genetic material of ALL resulting plants.


#9

Yes…and it is up to Congress to define those limited times. They have. 20 years or 14 years.

"For applications filed on or after June 8, 1995, utility and** plant** patents are granted for a term which begins with the date of the grant and usually ends 20 years from the date you first applied for the patent subject to the payment of appropriate maintenance fees. Design patents last 14 years from the date you are granted the patent. No maintenance fees are required for design patents.

Note: Patents in force on June 8, 1995 and patents issued thereafter on applications filed prior to June 8, 1995 automatically have a term that is the greater of the twenty year term discussed above or seventeen years from the patent grant."


#10

I haven’t been keeping up with the topic of the thread, but it seems to me that the latter precludes the former.


#11

The LATTER insures that you will be forced to BUY the former every year. (If you want the benefits of such crops).


#12

[quote=“Fantasy_Chaser, post:10, topic:36498”]
I haven’t been keeping up with the topic of the thread, but it seems to me that the latter precludes the former.
[/quote]Right now, it is the seeds that are Genetically Modified. These seeds produce bigger veggies/fruits. Monsanto feels that these seeds belong to them, even after you buy them. They are attempting to regulate how you use them. IOW, if you bought a 100 lb sack of GMO corn, and only used half, Monsanto is of the opinion that you should not be allowed to plant them, next season.
In addition, they are researching seeds that will produce inert seeds. Their aim is to force all farmers, to buy new seeds every season.
I have a large stockpile of seeds. I will be collecting more. This GMO detritus, is dangerous and unhealthy.


#13

Which seems to me would put money in the pocket of a supplier who doesn’t do that to the customer.


#14

Normally, that would be true. In this case:

  1. They have bought up most of the seed companies across the Midwest.
  2. They have lobbied and gotten passed, laws that make seed gathering more complicated.
  3. They are pushing anti-democracy laws that remove community control over their own counties, so Farmers and citizens cannot block the planting of Monsanto’s GM seeds.
  4. They have manipulated the EPA to make seed washing equipment illegal, unless a farmer spends 1-1.5 million to upgrade for each seed line. It also affects seed storage facilities, and even harvesting and transportation equipment.
    They really want a monopoly.

#15

This interrupts the free market. The causes libertarian types go after are so funny because they want free market yet believe in giant evil corporations controlling everything! Well, guess what? That’s what the free market IS!!! Sorry to burst your bubble, but I’m not exactly sure what you guys think a free market is. Maybe you are thinking about a** fair market**, (Unfortunately this is also what Obama wants). That is socialism!!!


#16

[quote=“jjf3rd77, post:15, topic:36498”]
This interrupts the free market. The causes libertarian types go after are so funny because they want free market yet believe in giant evil corporations controlling everything! Well, guess what? That’s what the free market IS!!! Sorry to burst your bubble, but I’m not exactly sure what you guys think a free market is. Maybe you are thinking about a** fair market**, (Unfortunately this is also what Obama wants). That is socialism!!!
[/quote]Sorry to burst your bubble, but a corporation is a government construct. Do you really need government permission to partner with someone or pool your investments? Yes? You sound like Mittens.

"Regulation is necessary to make a free market work."
Mitt Romney

If you’re going to obsess over libertarianism, you should probably learn more about them.

PS Afterall, Republicans and conservatives claim to be pro-life therefore they are pro-abortion.


#17

Uh yeah you do! I’m guessing you’ve never owned a business before. Ever hear of paperwork??? Ever hear of corporate mergers? Hell, just to put up a sign you need government permission from the state!


#18
  1. I’ve been voting for Romney for the past two elections! So, thanks. That’s not an insult to me, and any smart business person knows that they NEED to deal with the government to get things they want done!

  2. Believe me, I know all about you guys. You contradict yourselves with every statement you make. Read this carefully: You shouldn’t be angry at Monsanto. They are a corporation that gets away with pretty much everything right? So are you saying that they SHOULD follow government regulations? If so, then you shouldn’t be mad at the government for working with them! If you are mad at the government for regulating Monsanto than you shouldn’t be mad at Monsanto for going against government regulations. Where do you stand on the issue? Are you for big government regulations or free market enterprises like Monsanto! You can’t be mad at both, unless you really are an anarchist, and if you are you should just come out and say it!

  3. Well, since I only vote based on facts, not emotional social issues. I don’t see how this has any relevance to me. Besides I’m pro-choice. So that was an epic fail on your part.


#19

NO Cam. They don’t like lobbyists. It will all become clear to you on this thread. http://www.republicanoperative.com/forums/f10/lobbying-37714/


#20

[quote=“jjf3rd77, post:18, topic:36498”]

  1. Well, since I only vote based on facts, not emotional social issues. I don’t see how this has any relevance to me. Besides I’m pro-choice. So that was an epic fail on your part.
    [/quote]The only epic fail here is your chronic misunderstanding of what you read. I don’t care whether you are pro-life or pro-choice. Your arguments are *like *the PS I added about abortion. That you believe government paperwork is *necessary *to business simply because government *requires *it is very telling, clearly underscoring your support for big government and commitment to Keynesian and Marxist economics.