Slashdot Mirror
300k Organic Farmers To Sue Monsanto For Seed Patent Claims
microphage writes "Monsanto went after hundreds of farmers for infringing on their patented seed after audits revealed that their farms had contained their product — as a result of routine pollination by animals and acts of nature. Unable to afford a proper defense, competing small farms have been bought out by the company in droves. As a result, Monsanto saw their profits increase by the hundreds of millions over the last few years as a result. Between 1997 and 2010, Monsanto tackled 144 organic farms with lawsuits and investigated roughly 500 plantations annually during that span with a so-called 'seed police.'"
Yes... this is essentially what has been happening. Plus as part of the agreement that small farmers MUST sign they can not keep any of of their crop to be "cleaned" and used for next year's seed. The agreement essentially makes it that the plant is owned by Monsanto. Even if farmers steer clear of Monsanto seed, if there is any cross pollination and the the gene that Monsanto "owns" gets to be part of the crop then the seed police come knockin'.
If you are interested in more information about this and the other evil that Monsanto has been a part of, take a look at the movie and the book "The World According to Monsanto" by Marie-Monique Robin. She tries to be fair, but be aware it's very anti-Monstanto since they used the trick of never talking to her about anything.
No they aren't sterile. The terminator gene got SO MUCH bad press that they never were able to use it.
You can't control what the bees do. Cross pollination happens. The Monsanto genes have been found even in countries that have outlawed its use.
On top of this there have been fairly predatory actions by the "seed police" P.I.s. They look closely at *anyone* that does seed cleaning, and if there is any cross pollination they sue. There are even allegations they encouraged cross pollination so they could sue non-customers.
Despite the nonsense that certain organic farmers and various industry groups may claim, the terms "organic" and "genetically modified" are unrelated and in no way mutually exclusive. This is especially true in consumer foods, where the term "organic" is completely unregulated and thus meaningless, beyond than the implicit meaning of "really fucking expensive".
But the Monsanto patented crops are sterile
No, *you* don't know what you're talking about. Monsanto seed is not sterile. Read it for yourself, from their own website. They make it pretty clear "Monsanto has never developed or commercialized a sterile seed product."
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Isn't Organic now officially defined in the US?
Doesn't it exclude genetically modified?
http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=ORGANIC_CERTIFICATIO
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
You are correct. Actually they patent it. And judges have already ruled that even if your crop is contaminated with Monsanto's strain through direct see drift even if its a fraction of your crop then you Monsanto own your crop. All of it. Google David VS Monsanto for details.
The first post is a troll. No organic farmer is going to buy Monsanto tainted seed. The tainted seed ruins organic crops. You cannot sell your crop as organic if its contaminated with Monsanto gene. The farms get contaminated by Monsanto crops due to direct seed drift, cross pollination, bees etc. Monsanto knows this so they simply trespass on farmlands and steal samples. Then they sue the farmer out of business.
Organic does not mean no pesticides. There are pesticides that are certified organic, see here.
Some organic pesticides can cause cancer. Others are extremely toxic to surrounding wild life due to runoff. Organic pesticides may require more applications than equivalent non-organic pesticides.
I am not saying to not eat organic, but everyone needs to understand what "Organic" does and does not mean. And that term is under constant attack by large scale commercial farming organizations to water it down as much as they can. And most organic farms are not owning up to exactly how much organic pesticides they actually use. Or even disclosing the use of such pesticides.
Utterly wrong. Life can be patented. Plant Patent Act of 1930; Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980).
Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
SEC. 2105. 7 U.S.C. 6504 NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR ORGANIC PRODUCTION.
To be sold or labeled as an organically produced agricultural product under this title, an agricultural product shall --
(1) have been produced and handled without the use of synthetic chemicals, except as otherwise provided in this title;
(2) except as otherwise provided in this title and excluding livestock, not be produced on land to which any prohibited substances, including synthetic chemicals, have been applied during the 3 years immediately preceding the harvest of the agricultural products; and
(3) be produced and handled in compliance with an organic plan agreed to by the producer and handler of such product and the certifying agent.
I see nothing in that definition that prohibits "genetically modified" seed being used. In addition, the CFR seems to be most interested in restriction who can used the official USDA "organic" label, not in what can be referred to as "organic".
You, sir, are categorically wrong. I have known a family for years, with their own fields dedicated to seed production, that were entrapped in Monsanto's corruption. Their own land. Their own seed. Their own equipment.
They were threatened with a lawsuit, and they could not afford the money to defend themselves. Everyone around them was using Monsanto seed- they were positive it meant their crops had been contaminated with whatever blew over the fences over the 40-plus years their family had owned the operation.
One is now a cashier at Walmart. The other tries to be a woodworker. They don't raise seed on the place anymore- they lease it to someone who uses Monsanto seed.
Read The Windup Girl for a (fictionalized) glimpse at that thought.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Remeber that _tiny_ test plot of Bayer Life Sciences unapproved for consumption GMO rice that managed to contaminate the entire states rice supply in sufficient quantity that the states entire crop was wasted.
Hmmm... a tiny test plot, and and entire states crop ruined.
Some of that may have happened here too.
Monsanto GMO pollen trespasses on the organic farmers land, contaminating his crop. Farmer collects the seed. Seed exchanged with other farmers (genetic diversity is a good thing normally). Now the contaminated seed has spread well beyond the original farm.
Monsanto should have to pay for the cleanup of its contamination. And any losses the farmers suffered.
Wild rape seed in Canada is GMO now, due to "Roundup Ready" genes hopping over from GMO Canola. Containing GMO is a fantasy. And the costs for GMO contamination are born by the innocent party who was damaged in our corrupt corporate run country / world.
It's a Russian's goverment foreign propaganda arm, so it usually tries to shoot down Western views on Syria, Egypt, Libya - you name it. But this news bit seems to be legit. This is definitely screwed up situation. I hope that company gets it's lesson well.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
It's been tried. The Canadian Supreme Court declined to hear that case on the grounds that it did not meet the standards of a class action suit. Consequently Canada is in the perverse situation where Monsanto reaps all the financial benefit of distributing Roundup Ready Canola into the ecosystem, but bears no responsibility for the damage it does to people who don't want it.
That case was just two farmers trying to get class action status though. If this one is 300,000 farmers, then I suspect they'll have a much better chance.
Not exactly.
Breeding only selects on the allele level (except for the seldom situation of an actual and not life threatening gene mutation). That means you don't get any new genes into your lifestock, you just recombine the alleles and then select for the best combinations.
There is a way to actually get new genes into your lifestock, it's called hybridization. It works pretty well for plant species that are closely related, so are most citrus fruits actually hybrids. It does not work so well for animals, the few wellknown examples of hybrids are almost all sterile, like the mule.
Genetic engineering puts genes that come from completely different livings into the genome, e.g. bacterial genes into plants, vertebrate genes into bacteria etc.pp. You don't get that type of modifications with breeding.
And meanwhile, these seeds are about as healthy as dioxin.
Citation, please.
The plants are engineered to produce an insecticide that kills insects, and it's escaping from the fields...
Lets say an ecosystem needs insects: Having 85% of all the streams around a genetically modified crop being polluted with insecticide masquerading as food might be an issue... In fact, it would be equivalent to sprinkling the countryside with some level of dioxin.
I'd say that pesticides escaping and even proliferating on their own is a generally bad idea. You can disagree with me, but then morons also exist.
I call BS on this.
Anecdotal I know, but growing up on the farm when I showed up with a load of chopped corn the cows came running just as fast and ate just as much whether it was out of the non-GM fields (our fields) or a load that we bought the crop from the neighbor that only grew corn (GM).
Their might be some types of GM that the animals can detect (maybe the natural pesticides that some GMs produce) but they sure cannot detect all the GM crops.
So yes as the law that was purchased by Monsanto stands right now if Cheney's patented dog shits in your yard they Cheney owns all the shit in your yard from not only his dog but from yours also. This is the law as purchased by Monsanto.
The "synthetic chemicals" part has to do with adjuncts added to the soil, not the growing seed, so I don't think that would apply. But, as I'm reminded, Federal bureaucrats always provide their own interpretations of laws in the Federal Register, and enforce the law based on those rules, not the way consumers or businesses interpret them. The applicable version is found here, and states, in part:
So I'm convinced that the USDA will exclude any kind of GMO crop from certification as "organic".
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
It's way easier than that. All they need is to get one farmer in a region to use their seed, and the wind does the rest.