If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Global Research)   Federal judge rules that Monsanto can sue farmers for the wind   (globalresearch.ca) divider line 68
    More: Stupid, GMOs, Monsanto, Supreme Court, Organic Seed Growers, organic labels, farmers, United States courts of appeals, plain  
•       •       •

12578 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2014 at 5:09 PM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-01-15 05:21:24 PM
18 votes:
Oh for the love of . . .

1) the Supreme Court denied to hear the case.  This isnt a ruling, they generally deny to hear +99% of cases.

2) this was a suit by organic farmers suing Monsanto to preclude them from suing farmers in the future for inadvertant infringement (i.e. wind based distribution) .

3) As Monsanto hasn't brought such a suit, the organic farmers had no standing to sue.  There was no controversy (farmers were asking the court to prevent Monsanto from doing something Monsanto wasn't doing).

4) There is really no new or interesting law here, so of course the SCOTUS passed.

I may hate Monsanto too, but Jesus, this is a serious non-story here
2014-01-15 04:49:37 PM
17 votes:
This federal judge sponsored by Monsanto.
2014-01-15 05:14:01 PM
11 votes:

Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?


Yes.

Monsanto: The First Ones Up Against the Wall When the Revolution Comes
2014-01-15 05:16:25 PM
9 votes:
Monsanto reps in rural areas should start having 'accidents".
2014-01-15 05:20:07 PM
7 votes:
Dear Supreme court:

Every time you rule in favor of a corporate concern over common sense, you undermine the very fabric of american justice. There is no upside, there is no sentence containing a saving grace here. You've just done an evil deed in the name of money - impure and simple.
2014-01-15 05:18:38 PM
7 votes:
The judge is ruling that the farmers cannot sue to prevent Monsanto from suing. The farmers were preemptively suing even though Monsanto has stated that it has not sued anyone nor any interest in suing.

As much as I don't like Monsanto, the ruling makes complete sense to me.
2014-01-15 05:10:28 PM
6 votes:
So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?
2014-01-15 05:24:27 PM
5 votes:

SquiggsIN: Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?

Again DNRTA but, i've followed this issue and YES.  If FarmerX doesn't buy from them and FarmerY buys from them and as FarmerY's harvest truck passes FarmerX's field and one seed contaminates FarmerX's field it's now FarmerX's fault he's growing their patented product and must either start paying them or end up going bankrupt fighting them in court.


And you would be 100% wrong on the law.
2014-01-15 05:15:56 PM
4 votes:

Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?


Yes. And you can't sue them for polluting your gene pool without wasting all of your money in court, so that you have to go bankrupt.

Mexico has been trying for years to keep one of the last active gene pool resources for unmodified corn free of Monsanto.
2014-01-15 05:27:56 PM
3 votes:

SquiggsIN: DNRTA

I've kept up with most stories associated with agribusiness for a long time.

Monsanto is one of the most evil companies on the planet.

I don't know what has to happen to get more publicity on what is going on with our food system.  We have fewer and fewer companies controlling more and more of our supply and their goals generally have profit above safety or fairness.  Do we wait until every plant on the planet is patented?  I think Monsanto would love to spread their GMOs to the point they can sue you for the crabgrass in your yards.


Between the corporations farking us, the bankers robbing us, the police beating us, and the government growing increasingly corrupted about it all, it's hard to keep any one story going for any length of time.

anyone get the feeling it's time to start burning everything down?
2014-01-15 05:22:54 PM
3 votes:

Shadi: The judge is ruling that the farmers cannot sue to prevent Monsanto from suing. The farmers were preemptively suing even though Monsanto has stated that it has not sued anyone nor any interest in suing.

As much as I don't like Monsanto, the ruling makes complete sense to me.


You're' right; thought-crimes shouldn't count.
But that's not why they should be suing.
They should be suing Monsanto for a product that causes environmental pollution, interfering with their productivity.
And just because they haven't sued these particular farmers yet, their behavioral trend shows that they would have, if the farmers hadn't prevented it.
2014-01-15 05:14:01 PM
3 votes:
Well, we can see why the court favored Monsanto.  They totes promised not to sue.  "wink wink"
2014-01-15 08:35:09 PM
2 votes:
Lawyers, internet wannabe lawyers and fark educated, got news for you, as a FARMER, farmer and ex member of the bar Monsanto is the devil.   I cannot grow crops from seeds I harvest from my own land if they have been contaminated by the devils seed.  Try and find any farmer who can harvest their own seed!  The devil makes you buy theirs every year. This is part of the devils way of controlling farmers.  I want to grow my own organic, non gmo crops, and they pollute my land with their pollen.  Monsanto is evil.

/get off my porch
//ever taste a real tomato?
2014-01-15 06:05:30 PM
2 votes:

SquiggsIN: The law is wrong, the precedent is wrong, and it needs to be fixed.


So you should be allowed to sue someone to stop them from doing something that they are not doing and have agreed they won't do?  Could you explain exactly what part of this law is wrong?  How would you fix it?

SquiggsIN: Do you wonder why people hate lawyers too?


Because they understand how laws work?  Because as far as I can tell, you really really want to be mad about something here, are deeply misinformed about what that thing is, and are now lashing out against those who are attempting to help you remedy your ignorance.  I mean, whatever floats your boat, but pissed off and ignorant is no way to  . . . well ok its actually the American Pastime.  Carry on.
2014-01-15 06:02:16 PM
2 votes:

simkatu: SquiggsIN: Beyond the cases where this exact scenario has happened?  Monsanto has frequently done "spot inspections" of non-customers fields and then sued them for having a portion of their crop that had been contaminated by the glyphosate-resistant (Round-up ready) version of crops they've patented

[citation needed.jpg]

Monsato has not sued any farmer for having inadvertent wind blown seeds that contaminated their crops.  In fact, they have promised they will never sue a farmer that has only trace amounts of their patented seed in their field.

This lawsuit was apparently an effort by some people to proactively force Monsato to give them preemptive immunity to use Roundup ready seeds even if it's more than the trace amounts that might appear in their crops by the wind.    That's just silly.  No company is going to give blanket immunity to a set of plaintiffs ahead of time that would essentially allow those plaintiffs to steal their intellectual property in unlimited amounts and pay no fees or royalties.


This law suit is bs, but if I am a farmer who collects and reseeds, with everyone around me using round up ready, then I'd think in a few seasons, despite my wishes, my fields are going to be a lot more than trace amounts.
2014-01-15 05:59:43 PM
2 votes:

SquiggsIN: Beyond the cases where this exact scenario has happened?  Monsanto has frequently done "spot inspections" of non-customers fields and then sued them for having a portion of their crop that had been contaminated by the glyphosate-resistant (Round-up ready) version of crops they've patented


[citation needed.jpg]

Monsato has not sued any farmer for having inadvertent wind blown seeds that contaminated their crops.  In fact, they have promised they will never sue a farmer that has only trace amounts of their patented seed in their field.

This lawsuit was apparently an effort by some people to proactively force Monsato to give them preemptive immunity to use Roundup ready seeds even if it's more than the trace amounts that might appear in their crops by the wind.    That's just silly.  No company is going to give blanket immunity to a set of plaintiffs ahead of time that would essentially allow those plaintiffs to steal their intellectual property in unlimited amounts and pay no fees or royalties.

2014-01-15 05:37:38 PM
2 votes:

SquiggsIN: sprgrss: Except there is no scientific evidence to support your claim and GMO products are approved by the regulatory bodies for planting in the United States.  There is no colorable claim.

You must work in or be heavily invested in agribusiness to be this stupid on the subject.


Yes, anyone who understands science or the law is stupid or has a vested interest.
2014-01-15 05:33:52 PM
2 votes:
This just in, filing a lawsuit over something that hasn't occurred might not stand up in court.  More at 11.
2014-01-15 05:32:52 PM
2 votes:
SquiggsIN:
Beyond the cases where this exact scenario has happened?  Monsanto has frequently done "spot inspections" of non-customers fields and then sued them for having a portion of their crop that had been contaminated by the glyphosate-resistant (Round-up ready) version of crops they've patented.  Farmers who've been contaminated can't bank their own seeds and replant without being in violation of the patent law despite the fact that they've never bought the product and that it was the wind that put it on their property (or Monsanto employees with a vendetta).

The one major instance of a farmer being sued for infringement involved a farmer who purposefully infringed.

Monsanto has no colorable claim to sue a farmer who has Monsanto seed inadvertently land on his field.  Monsanto does have a colorable claim when said farmer recognizes that Monsanto seed is growing on his land and purposefully cultivates and segregate the seeds from those plants for the express purpose of growing Monsanto seed without paying the licensing fee.
2014-01-15 05:25:44 PM
2 votes:

meow said the dog: It is not something which I have the familiarity but sometimes I do the wearing of the boy briefs because they have the comfort so perhaps for the boy this is also the thing which provides to he the comfort. Was this the boyshorts or the thong of the underwear? I am not someone who has the assureness of this but would wish for learning of so.


www.foxers.com
2014-01-15 05:20:55 PM
2 votes:
Monsanto is one of the most evil companies on the planet.

THIS. Farkin' food fascism.
2014-01-15 05:20:53 PM
2 votes:
2014-01-15 05:18:34 PM
2 votes:
So, if Monsanto renegs, and starts suing people whose crops have been inadvertently contaminated, will this ruling be voided?
Bet not.
2014-01-15 05:18:24 PM
2 votes:
Monsanto has been doing this for ages.. This isn't new..
2014-01-15 05:12:39 PM
2 votes:
Many thanks to Greenpeace for paying for the laws that made both this lawsuit and Monsanto's dominant market position possible.
2014-01-16 01:58:32 AM
1 votes:
images3.wikia.nocookie.net
Typical Monsanto board meeting
2014-01-15 08:55:42 PM
1 votes:

Kahabut: meat0918: Yes, they are evil, but I'm calling bullshiat on your "I can't grow stuff because of Monsanto", and "Monsanto makes you buy their seed".

Otherwise, how the fark do other farmers grow organic crops??

Why don't you talk to the farmers in Oregon that had their wheat embargoed because some Monsanto seed got mixed in by the wind.


I did.

Prevailing opinion is industrial sabotage, since the seed was never in commercial production, and the seed place then sent it to be destroyed has no idea if they actually destroyed it or where that seed is.
2014-01-15 08:45:22 PM
1 votes:

trophy1903: Lawyers, internet wannabe lawyers and fark educated, got news for you, as a FARMER, farmer and ex member of the bar Monsanto is the devil.   I cannot grow crops from seeds I harvest from my own land if they have been contaminated by the devils seed.  Try and find any farmer who can harvest their own seed!  The devil makes you buy theirs every year. This is part of the devils way of controlling farmers.  I want to grow my own organic, non gmo crops, and they pollute my land with their pollen.  Monsanto is evil.

/get off my porch
//ever taste a real tomato?


Yes, they are evil, but I'm calling bullshiat on your "I can't grow stuff because of Monsanto", and "Monsanto makes you buy their seed".

Otherwise, how the fark do other farmers grow organic crops??

Also, plant some hedges and use some set backs from other corn crops.  Here are some basic guidelines http://ohioline.osu.edu/agf-fact/0153.html
2014-01-15 07:52:34 PM
1 votes:

Shadi: Kahabut: Except for the 150+ lawsuits and 700 other cases settled out of court, sure, makes perfect sense.

"Since 1997, we have only filed suit against farmers 145 times in the United States. This may sound like a lot, but when you consider that we sell seed to more than 250,000 American farmers a year, it's really a small number. Of these, we've proceeded through trial with only eleven farmers. All eleven cases were found in Monsanto's favor."

Your numbers are just a tad bit off. And even the lawsuits Monsanto mentions are saved seed lawsuits, not wind blown. Farmers purchased Monsanto product and tried to violate the licensing.


Out of the couple hundred million starbucks customers, how many do you think starbucks has sued?

You're quoting Monsanto, justifying themselves.  You don't see a problem with that?

I'm not going to argue the point.  Seed purchased is seed owned.  Screw  licensing and screw you for even entertaining the thought that you can tell me what I can do with a PHYSICAL OBJECT THAT I PAID FOR.  It's called ownership.

Monsanto is a perfect example of everything that is wrong with our legal and business frameworks.

So I'm just curious, are you a patent troll, work for monsanto, or just a moron?
2014-01-15 07:44:10 PM
1 votes:

Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?


Yes, and in fact they have deliberately contaminated competitors' fields with their products in order to sue them into oblivion.
2014-01-15 07:08:49 PM
1 votes:
Great! Monsanto has its own secret rubber stamp court just like the NSA.
2014-01-15 06:58:12 PM
1 votes:
So if they can sue you for them contaminating your crops can you sue them for contaminating your crops? Seems that it would work both ways.
2014-01-15 06:27:41 PM
1 votes:

simkatu: NickelP: Just reread it. They pledged not to sue if less than 1% is their seed. What a joke.

But in all the years of Roundup there has never been a person with more than 1% of their crop that was Roundup ready that has been sued that wasn't intentionally and knowingly stealing the product.   While, 1% might seem like an unreasonably small amount to guarantee, it seems like it's a level that has worked so far, seeing as how not a single person has ever inadvertently discovered had a crop with more than 1%.


Isn't that just a really biased way of saying they have won every case where at least on percent of their seed was found? I don't think that is surprising. It is the point of the lawsuit.
2014-01-15 06:18:40 PM
1 votes:

NickelP: Just reread it. They pledged not to sue if less than 1% is their seed. What a joke.


But in all the years of Roundup there has never been a person with more than 1% of their crop that was Roundup ready that has been sued that wasn't intentionally and knowingly stealing the product.   While, 1% might seem like an unreasonably small amount to guarantee, it seems like it's a level that has worked so far, seeing as how not a single person has ever inadvertently discovered had a crop with more than 1%.
2014-01-15 06:15:48 PM
1 votes:

tlars699: Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?

Actually if Monsanto Pollen can be found to have germinated your corn, then yes, they can sue you for not buying their genetics. They have developed a genetic code that enables them to figure that out fairly quickly, sort of like a trademark on DNA.
See, you're not paying them for seed corn. You're paying them for a genetic product that they exclusively developed from scratch. So, if you have their genetic product in your corn, then you're stealing their product.

However, this would all change if it were considered biological contamination, otherwise known as pollution.



-- Best response there.

---- FTA:
"If Monsanto can patent seeds for financial gain, they should be forced to pay for contaminating a farmer's field, not be allowed to sue them,"said Dave Murphy, founder and executive director of Food Democracy Now!, in a statement  "Once again, America's farmers have been denied justice, while Monsanto's reign of intimidation is allowed to continue in rural America."

I'm REALLY surprised there haven't been terrorist attacks on anything Monsanto yet.
Or have they happened and the Monsanto-bought PRESS didn't mention it?
2014-01-15 06:13:04 PM
1 votes:

SquiggsIN: Theaetetus: SquiggsIN: The law is wrong, the precedent is wrong, and it needs to be fixed.

Sure, but then your complaint shouldn't be about "stupid judges" or "corrupt courts", but rather "stupid legislators" and "corrupt congress". 

Do you wonder why people hate lawyers too?

Nah, it's normal. People tend to hate and fear that which they don't understand.

That's the worst part about most lawyers.  You all think you're smarter than the rest of us because you're in the DELIBERATELY-CONVOLUTED PROFESSION of law-making.


I'm also an engineer. That makes me even more technical and pedantic.
2014-01-15 06:08:39 PM
1 votes:

Cathedralmaster: Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?

Yes.

Monsanto: The First Ones Up Against the Wall When the Revolution Comes


Get your Guy Fawkes masks, ham radio's and pitchforks ready...

But seriously there is a diminishing retruns effect going on.  Things continue to get so bizarre and f'd that there is less ability to form a reaction.  This just seems like another move toward a straight corporatocracy.

Am I that wrong?
2014-01-15 06:07:57 PM
1 votes:

NickelP: simkatu: SquiggsIN: Beyond the cases where this exact scenario has happened?  Monsanto has frequently done "spot inspections" of non-customers fields and then sued them for having a portion of their crop that had been contaminated by the glyphosate-resistant (Round-up ready) version of crops they've patented

[citation needed.jpg]

Monsato has not sued any farmer for having inadvertent wind blown seeds that contaminated their crops.  In fact, they have promised they will never sue a farmer that has only trace amounts of their patented seed in their field.

This lawsuit was apparently an effort by some people to proactively force Monsato to give them preemptive immunity to use Roundup ready seeds even if it's more than the trace amounts that might appear in their crops by the wind.    That's just silly.  No company is going to give blanket immunity to a set of plaintiffs ahead of time that would essentially allow those plaintiffs to steal their intellectual property in unlimited amounts and pay no fees or royalties.

This law suit is bs, but if I am a farmer who collects and reseeds, with everyone around me using round up ready, then I'd think in a few seasons, despite my wishes, my fields are going to be a lot more than trace amounts.


Just reread it. They pledged not to sue if less than 1% is their seed. What a joke.
2014-01-15 06:07:03 PM
1 votes:

Teiritzamna: Oh for the love of . . .

1) the Supreme Court denied to hear the case.  This isnt a ruling, they generally deny to hear +99% of cases.

2) this was a suit by organic farmers suing Monsanto to preclude them from suing farmers in the future for inadvertant infringement (i.e. wind based distribution) .

3) As Monsanto hasn't brought such a suit, the organic farmers had no standing to sue.  There was no controversy (farmers were asking the court to prevent Monsanto from doing something Monsanto wasn't doing).

4) There is really no new or interesting law here, so of course the SCOTUS passed.

I may hate Monsanto too, but Jesus, this is a serious non-story here


Yep

/stop making since on this site. it will get you called all kinds of names.
2014-01-15 06:05:13 PM
1 votes:

SquiggsIN: The law is wrong, the precedent is wrong, and it needs to be fixed.


Sure, but then your complaint shouldn't be about "stupid judges" or "corrupt courts", but rather "stupid legislators" and "corrupt congress". 

Do you wonder why people hate lawyers too?

Nah, it's normal. People tend to hate and fear that which they don't understand.
2014-01-15 05:57:52 PM
1 votes:
You know I'm not sure WHAT I think of GMO products.... Is it ok to take a fish gene and put it in corn (just making up something)...

What I hate is the corporate control and 'ownership' the courts seem to be giving to corporations..

HOW can you patent LIFE? Modified or not?

On topic, HOW can you sue me if I grow your shiat on MY property - If I STOLE it then there are laws against that already on the books....If I bought it, or it blew in, too bad - it's MINE.

There should be no laws against what nature does, well, naturally!
2014-01-15 05:52:18 PM
1 votes:

sprgrss: KidneyStone: Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?

More like pollen, but yeah. And Monsanto has been doing it for years.

No, Monsanto has not been doing that for years.

I wish people would actually read the court cases instead of relying upon shiatty advocacy journalists.


Ha you know what's funny, I have you Fav. with the comment "Monsanto Shill. Constantly argues even when proven wrong " so I guess its not surprising to see you in here shilling for them!
2014-01-15 05:51:27 PM
1 votes:
If you're a local farmer whose crop has been contaminated, you should sue Monsanto for damaging your property.
2014-01-15 05:42:55 PM
1 votes:
static2.wikia.nocookie.net
You think you own wherever your seeds land on
The crops are just a live thing you can claim
But I know every stalk of wheat and corn and rye
Has a life, has a spirit, has a name

You think the only farmers who are people
Are the farmers who purchase licenses from you
But if your patents get invalidated
You'll be unable to sue, you cannot sue

Have you ever heard Monsanto cry 'bout blue corn fields?
Or said that soybean farmers have all sinned?
Can you sing with all the voices of the lawyers?
Can your seeds spread far and wide via the wind?
Can your lawsuits follow each breath of the wind?
2014-01-15 05:41:55 PM
1 votes:

Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?


Yup.
2014-01-15 05:40:35 PM
1 votes:

Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?


Actually if Monsanto Pollen can be found to have germinated your corn, then yes, they can sue you for not buying their genetics. They have developed a genetic code that enables them to figure that out fairly quickly, sort of like a trademark on DNA.
See, you're not paying them for seed corn. You're paying them for a genetic product that they exclusively developed from scratch. So, if you have their genetic product in your corn, then you're stealing their product.

However, this would all change if it were considered biological contamination, otherwise known as pollution.
2014-01-15 05:40:19 PM
1 votes:

SquiggsIN: sprgrss: SquiggsIN: sprgrss: Except there is no scientific evidence to support your claim and GMO products are approved by the regulatory bodies for planting in the United States.  There is no colorable claim.

You must work in or be heavily invested in agribusiness to be this stupid on the subject.

Yes, anyone who understands science or the law is stupid or has a vested interest.

How much Monsanto stock do you own exactly?


I own no shares of Monsanto stock.  Neither do I work for, nor anyone who does work for Monsanto.

Instead of attempting to make this about me, why don't we stick with the subject.
2014-01-15 05:36:46 PM
1 votes:

teenage mutant ninja rapist: SquiggsIN: DNRTA

I've kept up with most stories associated with agribusiness for a long time.

Monsanto is one of the most evil companies on the planet.

I don't know what has to happen to get more publicity on what is going on with our food system.  We have fewer and fewer companies controlling more and more of our supply and their goals generally have profit above safety or fairness.  Do we wait until every plant on the planet is patented?  I think Monsanto would love to spread their GMOs to the point they can sue you for the crabgrass in your yards.

Between the corporations farking us, the bankers robbing us, the police beating us, and the government growing increasingly corrupted about it all, it's hard to keep any one story going for any length of time.

anyone get the feeling it's time to start burning everything down?


yes. VERY YES!
2014-01-15 05:34:09 PM
1 votes:
ignacio:
As part of the litigation, they made a voluntary promise not to do that anymore, backed with a legal document that would prevent them from doing so even if they changed their minds. Because of that, the court ruled that there was no need for additional protections against such events, which means no need for the courts to do anything.

No, that's not what happened.  The court said because Monsanto isn't suing people then there is no case or controversy and therefore the case is not justiciable.
2014-01-15 05:34:04 PM
1 votes:

SquiggsIN: Farmers who've been contaminated can't bank their own seeds and replant without being in violation of the patent law despite the fact that they've never bought the product and that it was the wind that put it on their property (or Monsanto employees with a vendetta).


Bad facts make bad law. In the Bowman case, he wasn't just an innocent farmer who happened to have windblown patented seeds in his field - he bred several generations while applying RoundUp specifically to kill off all of the non-Monsanto crops and get a genetically pure Monsanto field. Him being a dick and trying to get something without paying for it basically killed any chance of a favorable decision on patent exhaustion.
2014-01-15 05:31:47 PM
1 votes:

The Life Of Brian: Such a farce - WHY even claim there is 'democracy' any more.....(or a 'republic' as you Yanks like to say)

Are they next going to patent the load I put in my sock tonight??

Hope I don't spill any since that then could be used to make another me through cross contamination - and TRUST ME you do NOT want another ME!


They wanted to, and if your name was Henrietta Lacks, then yes they could.
But luckily for you, one dude in CA already won that lawsuit for you. He had rare antibodies, and a blood collection agency was trying to patent his DNA and turn it into meds, and give him NO proceeds, even though they could only get the antibodies from the dude. Dude won. Yay!
2014-01-15 05:31:37 PM
1 votes:

Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?


Not any more.

In a June 2013 ruling, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC said it was inevitable, as the farmers' argued, that contamination from Monsanto's products would occur. Yet the appeals panel also said the plaintiffs do not have standing to prohibit Monsanto from suing them should the company's genetic traits end up on their holdings "because Monsanto has made binding assurances that it will not 'take legal action against growers whose crops might inadvertently contain traces of Monsanto biotech genes (because, for example, some transgenic seed or pollen blew onto the grower's land).'"


As part of the litigation, they made a voluntary promise not to do that anymore, backed with a legal document that would prevent them from doing so even if they changed their minds. Because of that, the court ruled that there was no need for additional protections against such events, which means no need for the courts to do anything.
2014-01-15 05:30:07 PM
1 votes:
tlars699:
Then the organic farmers' lawyers are stupid, because polluting the environment, inhibiting your productivity, is a very real thing that you can sue over.
Organic Non-GMO farmers' corn would be polluted by Monsanto DNA, thus ensuring that the farmers can only sell their inspected goods as inferior product at lower prices- ie GMO corn.


Except there is no scientific evidence to support your claim and GMO products are approved by the regulatory bodies for planting in the United States.  There is no colorable claim.
2014-01-15 05:28:57 PM
1 votes:
Wasn't it Monsanto that patented a way of raising pigs and then sued people for raising pigs like they do?

Maybe I'm imagining that.
2014-01-15 05:28:15 PM
1 votes:

tlars699: highendmighty: This lawsuit brought to you by the makers of Agent Orange - destroying food for 3 generations.

Seriously? I need links, to spread on the facebooks.


wiki Monsanto - you get this: The company also formerly manufactured controversial products such as the insecticide DDT, PCBs, Agent Orange, and recombinant bovine somatotropin (a.k.a. bovine growth hormone).
Their first ever product was saccharin.   PRAISE THE ARTIFICE!
On the bright side, they did develop LED's...
2014-01-15 05:27:02 PM
1 votes:
tlars699:
And just because they haven't sued these particular farmers yet, their behavioral trend shows that they would have, if the farmers hadn't prevented it.

No, not even remotely close.  The farmers didn't prevent anything.
2014-01-15 05:26:39 PM
1 votes:
For eight years I have been the leading supplier of hybrid seed corn in Winneshiek County, and the reason is clear: My seed is pure!

I have come to assume my dominant position in this farm community due to the high quality and timely delivery of my seed. Come to Schmidt Feed & Farm Supply, conveniently located in Kendallville just over the bridge, and you will leave smiling and satisfied in every way, if not utterly amazed at the performance. You must have my seed!

Use my select seed, and your crop will show resistance to blight and drought and be less susceptible to strain stalk diseases. If you do not believe me, I will take you to my farm and show you the potency of my seed. Strong, turgid, fattening plants shoot up through the ground in the torrid Iowa sun.
Grab the thick base of the stalk in your hand and feel that it is alive and growing larger by the minute. Sweat will shine on your face as you ride my massive tractor around the grounds of my expansive farm.
I will smile down at you as you kneel and gently run your hands through the moist patch of dense growth at my most precious, secret spot-the plot of land where I personally test each and every variety of seed corn that I sell.

Ask me for my seed, and the day you have longed for, the day you have dreamed about, will soon arrive: When the corn is large and ripe for the taking, you can place your lips around the heavy cob, savoring the texture, the smell and, finally, the taste as you bite gently and your mouth is filled with sweet juice.
2014-01-15 05:26:24 PM
1 votes:
Here's to hoping they fight that BS decision.

If anything, farmers should be able to sue Monsanto for spreading their crap GMO seeds.
2014-01-15 05:26:22 PM
1 votes:
This is f*cking stupid.
2014-01-15 05:25:50 PM
1 votes:
I don't see any inherent conflict in allowing companies a financial incentive to control the food supply. Nope, no problems there.
2014-01-15 05:25:09 PM
1 votes:

SquiggsIN: Somaticasual: Dear Supreme court:

Every time you rule in favor of a corporate concern over common sense, you undermine the very fabric of american justice. There is no upside, there is no sentence containing a saving grace here. You've just done an evil deed in the name of money - impure and simple.

But, CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE!   Think of the corporations!  I'm 100% convinced at this point that everything from the DEA to the EPA is up for sale for the right price.


I have to ask, do you even understand what corporate personhood even means?
2014-01-15 05:23:05 PM
1 votes:
While Monsanto may be a bunch of dicks, the appeals court wasn't going to refuse to give them standing to sue farmers after the Supreme Court gave them a win against a farmer a month earlier.
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-01-15 05:17:15 PM
1 votes:

meow said the dog: It is not something which I have the familiarity but sometimes I do the wearing of the boy briefs because they have the comfort so perhaps for the boy this is also the thing which provides to he the comfort. Was this the boyshorts or the thong of the underwear? I am not someone who has the assureness of this but would wish for learning of so.


www.lifeonpaws.co.uk
2014-01-15 05:16:25 PM
1 votes:
This lawsuit brought to you by the makers of Agent Orange - destroying food for 3 generations.
2014-01-15 05:15:43 PM
1 votes:

Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?


Yes.

So the only solution is to buy up houses next to their board of directors' homes, plant some patented grass and start suing them if even a blade of grass from your crop starts growing on their property
2014-01-15 05:14:51 PM
1 votes:
It is not something which I have the familiarity but sometimes I do the wearing of the boy briefs because they have the comfort so perhaps for the boy this is also the thing which provides to he the comfort. Was this the boyshorts or the thong of the underwear? I am not someone who has the assureness of this but would wish for learning of so.
2014-01-15 05:13:23 PM
1 votes:

Blues_X: So, if their seeds are blown onto your property and germinate, they can sue you for not paying for them?

Am I reading that right?


That's pretty much it...as far as I read, too.

But surely that cannot be right.  We're missing something, right?  It's only if they try to knowingly use them or knowingly sell them, right?  I think that's lame, too, but at least it's more logical.
2014-01-15 05:10:32 PM
1 votes:
Next they will come for the space between.
 
Displayed 68 of 68 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report