Slashdot Mirror

I am also a linux sysadmin and oppose software patents. The biotech industry is at the forefront of lobbing for more intellectual property rights. http://www.bio.org/articles/unleashing-promise-biotechnology I oppose lifeform patents so if corporations dabble in genetic engineering they are on their own. No public subsidies should go to biotech (and yes patents are a subsidy)

The Biotechnology Industry Organization maintains a list of GM seed on the market here:

http://www.bio.org/speeches/pubs/er/agri_products.asp

Strawberries and tomatoes are indeed present.

If the company buys new shares to give to the employees, it is an expense, and as far as I know, has always been treated that way.

Stock options from newly printed stock are a payment from the shareholders (who's share of the company is diluted) to the employees. The company is just an intermediary, and does not lose any money (outside of printing costs). It's no different than if all of the stockholders decided to give 10% of their stock to someone, the company doesn't lose anything. Saying that they do lose something seems like lying about revenue.

This isn't ripping off stockholders as long as they state that they printed more shares.

Actually, forget what I said and just read the second bulleted paragraph here. They state the issue much more elequently than I can. "Unlike other forms of compensation, stock options impose no financial drain on a company."

Or, from a less biased source: "Every other expense decreases the net worth of the corporation, whereas stock options, when exercised, actually increase it."

Just so someone tells the other side of the story. :)

Yndrd1984

I have rarely heard of the patent office issuing two patents for the exact same invention. Though a distinction may be slight, it is still a distinction. When two or more inventors submit an application for the same invention, the PTO declares an interference. Here is a short blurb on interferences. It is highly unlikely that two applications for the exact same invention would get all the way through to granting without any differences. Even if the applications started out the same, they would likely get trimmed back during prosecution such that they were claiming different submject matter.

You're only making things worse. You misquoted (perhaps intentionally) to further your definition in hopes that no one would find the Dupont site. The actual line you're quoting, sans elipsis, states, "Transgenics (often referred to as biotechnology) is the application of scientific knowledge to transfer beneficial genetic traits from one species to another to enhance or protect an organism."

They are clearly talking about the field of transgenics, which is what you called 'biotechnology', they were merely stating that it is often called biotechnology, but with the implication that biotech refers to a much larger spectrum.

Even further, if you would have followed the link to the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO)'s glossary, you would have found that they describe biotechnology as, "Biotechnology -
The use of biological processes to solve problems or make useful products." under which the product in question would surely fall.

Er, either you are using "biotech" to mean something other than the biotech industry (perhaps you are thinking of the human genome project?), or you are totally oblivious to what biotech has already done. How about human insulin, human growth hormone, erythropoieten, herceptin or tissue plasminogen activator? Here's some info on biotech products that are already here. Ok, so this website is sponsored by the industry and is not an unbiased source, but they refer to 'more than 90 biotech drugs and vaccines approved by the FDA'.

Sorry you're spreading more misinformation. Your statement about bt corn having the potential to kill you is absolutely FALSE.

First the Bt isn't expressed in the grain, just in the stalk and leaves.

Second Bt is completely harmless to humans but certain insects can't tolerate it. Bt is so safe to humans that it has been used for years as a natural insecticide on ORGANIC production.

U.S. farmers plant hybrid varieties of corn which are not capable of reproduction the following year. Every spring the farmer must purchase new corn seed to plant.

The hybrid corn itself is grown under very stringent rules that specify buffer areas to prevent a neighbors crop from pollinating the seed crop. This has been done for years to maintain the seeds purity long before Bt corn was on the market.

Check out the biotech industry organization's website if you want facts and not fiction Here

Man Holmes