meat0918: Kahabut: 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?It hasn't been that way for a long long long time.You're going to fight 100+ years of precedent on seed propagation and selling. It isn't exactly something new that came along with Monsanto.Blame Burpee if you're going to blame anyone.
SquiggsIN: How much Monsanto stock do you own exactly?
cryinoutloud: SquiggsIN: How much Monsanto stock do you own exactly?Honest to god. This is all I needed to read:"Monsanto never has and has committed it never will sue if our patented seed or traits are found in a farmer's field as a result of inadvertent means," said Kyle McClain, the Monsanto's chief litigation counsel, according to Reuters.I think it's clear enough. Doesn't matter if they haven't done it yet, they reserve the right to do it. And so they will. Because eventually their GMO material will be everywhere, and it will then be worthless. Unless they take drastic steps to protect it.Enjoy your Roundup food.
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?
trophy1903: ]I want to grow my own organic, non gmo crops, and they pollute my land with their pollen. Monsanto is evil.
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??
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.
meat0918: 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.
On Myth 2, Mr. Charles completely adopts Monsanto's argument on these points and ignores the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs in the OSGATA et al v Monsanto lawsuit, like me, that Monsanto has repeatedly accused those contaminated with its seed of patent infringement, including Troy Roush and Dawn and David Runyon.Monsanto has not denied these cases, and instead points to other cases where farmers were not contaminated. But just because Monsanto sometimes sues farmers who intentionally used their seed DOES NOT mean they've NEVER accused farmers who did not intentionally possess their seed. Further, what's the word "trace" mean when Monsanto says "We won't sue farmers fo possessing TRACE amounts of our seed." Contamination is often unnoticeable unless/until someone tests their seed supply or is contaminated by RoundUp and then notices some of their field doesn't suffer. Thus, contamination can be in much more than "trace" amounts.Lastly, we asked Monsanto to simply put in writing that they'd never sue us before we moved forward with the case. Instead of simply confirming they'd never sue us, since we want nothing to do with their GE seed, Monsanto instead hired a team of lawyers and accused us, the plaintiffs, of trying to pull a publicity stunt and being liars. I'd much rather be tending to the work on my seed farm than being involved in a lawsuit against one of the biggest, most aggressive companies in the world, but I have to protect myself and this case, where we're only seeking the peace of mind that Monsanto could never sue us for patent infringement (and not a single dime), is the only way to do so.If Mr. Charles really thinks its a "myth" that Monsanto would ever sue me or my co-plaintiffs or other organic, biodynamic and plainly non-GMO farmers for patent infringement, I'd gladly take an insurance policy from him offering to defend me from any potential accusations in the future. If he's not willing to give me that insurance policy, then he's not willing to put his money where his mouth is, which is exactly what I'm being forced to do today, put my money and my business and my family's future on the line hoping and praying Monsanto never sues me for patent infringement when I get contaminated by their seed, something they do not even dispute will happen due to the prevalence of their seed in the marketplace.Jim Gerritsen, PresidentOrganic Seed Growers and Trade AssociationLead Plaintiff, OSGATA et al v. MonsantoWashington,
Kahabut: sprgrss: Kahabut: So you're taking the moron route. Interesting.A lease is not a sale, is not a rental is not a dog. But it's nice to know you are so confused you can't tell the difference.I want you to distinguish leases from licensing rights.Show me the "lease" that Monsanto uses. For that matter, show me where licensing rights have any jurisdiction over physical objects sold to a third party. (hint, software is not a physical object, and is never technically sold, only access to the software is sold)Ever heard of the doctrine of first sale?
Mithraic_bullshiat: Why can't the farmers turn it around on Monsanto and sue them for contaminating their crops with GMOs?
sprgrss: 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.
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
Mithraic_bullshiat: ."Remember the shiat another corporation tried to do with India and Basmati Rice.
SquiggsIN: Theaetetus: 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.After going to engineering school and being around nothing but engineers for a few years I decided I didn't want to be around assholes like you all the time. Thought about law school for myself too, and again, decided that being able to sleep at night was more important than lining a bank account.
notto: trophy1903: ]I want to grow my own organic, non gmo crops, and they pollute my land with their pollen. Monsanto is evil.Starts with your neighbors. Wouldn't they be the evil ones for planting the Monsanto seed? Are they evil because they want higher yields? Aren't you polluting their GMO RR crops with your pollen as well?Would you support their right to sue you if you do?Who was growing their first? You or your neighbors?
SquiggsIN: DNRTAI'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.
gaspode: Monsanto apparently already entered a binding agreement not to sue anyone over unintentional inclusion, and would certainly fail should they ever try to claim against someone over such a thing anyway.
sweetmelissa31: gaspode: Monsanto apparently already entered a binding agreement not to sue anyone over unintentional inclusion, and would certainly fail should they ever try to claim against someone over such a thing anyway.Why should they fail? They have tons of money, and their agreement only pertains to farms with <1% contamination.
If you like these links, you'll love
Come for the Total, stay for the Farking.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2018 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Apr 22 2018 05:25:46
Runtime: 0.414 sec (413 ms)