The New Piracy Threat: Farmers

manadren · Post by **manadren** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:00 am

Monsanto Suing Farmers Over Piracy Issues

Thu Jan 13, 9:51 PM ET
By PAUL ELIAS, AP Biotechnology Writer
Yahoo Link

SAN FRANCISCO - Monsanto Co.'s "seed police" snared soy farmer Homan McFarling in 1999, and the company is demanding he pay it hundreds of thousands of dollars for alleged technology piracy. McFarling's sin? He saved seed from one harvest and replanted it the following season, a revered and ancient agricultural practice.

"My daddy saved seed. I saved seed," said McFarling, 62, who still grows soy on the 5,000 acre family farm in Shannon, Miss. and is fighting the agribusiness giant in court.

Saving Monsanto's seeds, genetically engineered to kill bugs and resist weed sprays, violates provisions of the company's contracts with farmers.

Since 1997, Monsanto has filed similar lawsuits 90 times in 25 states against 147 farmers and 39 agriculture companies, according to a report issued Thursday by The Center for Food Safety, a biotechnology foe.

In a similar case a year ago, Tennessee farmer Kem Ralph was sued by Monsanto and sentenced to eight months in prison after he was caught lying about a truckload of cotton seed he hid for a friend.

Ralph's prison term is believed to be the first criminal prosecution linked to Monsanto's crackdown. Ralph has also been ordered to pay Monsanto more than $1.7 million.

The company itself says it annually investigates about 500 "tips" that farmers are illegally using its seeds and settles many of those cases before a lawsuit is filed.

In this way, Monsanto is attempting to protect its business from pirates in much the same way the entertainment industry does when it sues underground digital distributors exploiting music, movies and video games.

In the process, it has turned farmer on farmer and sent private investigators into small towns to ask prying questions of friends and business acquaintances.

Monsanto's licensing contracts and litigation tactics are coming under increased scrutiny as more of the planet's farmland comes under genetically engineered cultivation.

Some 200 million acres of the world's farms grew biotech crops last year, an increase of 20 percent from 2003, according to a separate report released Wednesday.

Many of the farmers Monsanto has sued say, as McFarling claims, that they didn't read the company's technology agreement close enough. Others say they never received an agreement in the first place.

The company counters that it sues only the most egregious violations and is protecting the 300,000 law-abiding U.S. farmers who annually pay a premium for its technology. Soy farmers, for instance, pay a "technology fee" of about $6.50 an acre each year.

Some 85 percent of the nation's soy crop is genetically engineered to resist Monsanto's herbicide Roundup, a trait many farmers say makes it easier to weed their fields and ultimately cheaper to grow their crops.

"It's a very efficient and cost-effective way to raise soy beans and that's why the market has embraced it," said Ron Heck, who grows 900 acres of genetically engineered soy beans in Perry, Iowa.

Heck, who is also chairman of the American Soybean Association, said he doesn't mind buying new seed each year and appreciates Monsanto's crackdown on competitors who don't pay for their seed.

"You can save seed if you want to use the old technology," Heck said.

The company said the licensing agreement protects its more than 600 biotech-related patents and ensures a return on its research and development expenses, which amount to more than $400 million annually.

"We have to balance our obligations and our responsibilities to our customers, to our employees and to our shareholders," said Scott Baucum, Monsanto's chief intellectual property protector.

Still, Monsanto's investigative tactics are sewing seeds of fear and mistrust in some farming communities, company critics say.

Monsanto encourages farmers to call a company hot line with piracy tips, and private investigators in its employ act on leads with visits to the associates of suspect farmers.

Baucum acknowledged that the company walks a fine line when it sues farmers.

"It is very uncomfortable for us," Baucum said. "They are our customers and they are important to us."

The Center for Food Safety established its own hot line Thursday where farmers getting sued can receive aid. It also said it hopes to convene a meeting among defense lawyers to develop legal strategies to fight Monsanto.

The company said it has gone to trial five times and has never lost a legal fight against an accused pirate. The U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) in 1980 allowed for the patenting of genetically engineered life forms and extended the same protections to altered plants in 2001. Earlier this year, a Washington D.C. federal appeals court specifically upheld Monsanto's license.

"It's sad. It's sickening. I'm disillusioned," said Rodney Nelson, a North Dakota farmer who settled a Monsanto suit in 2001 that he said was unfairly filed. "We have a heck of an uphill battle that I don't think can be won."

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22087

manadren · Post by **manadren** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:06 am

I think this brings up an important issue about the nature of genetically engineered crops and copyright. What do you do when a patented product, by it's very nature makes illegal copies of itself?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22089

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:33 am

That's rediculous. I mean it's his crops he should be able to do what he pleases with the seeds. At first I thought it was a joke but I guess it's real.

So if I buy oranges and use the seeds to grow my own, it's illegal.

well not like they would grow here anyway.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22091

Stasi · Post by **Stasi** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 6:10 pm

I hope more farmers become pirates. It'd be fun to drive to the small towns on a road trip and see a bunch of peg-legs and shanty-singing blackbeards.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22147

MrSelf · Post by **MrSelf** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:56 pm

He bought genetrically modified seeds with the stipulation that he could not use them again. Its that simple. If he didn't like the deal, he should not have taken it, that's the thing with a free market, if the deal sucks and no one takes it, the seller has to make it worthwhile. If you agree to crappy terms, you are the idiot.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22285

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:43 pm

I still find it rediculous that the anti-piracy people are going that far though. I mean common, it's seed, it's natural (well maybe not anymore, if it's geneticly modified).

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22351

MrSelf · Post by **MrSelf** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 2:18 am

Intellectual property in the new gold, my friend. The 21st century will revolve around the idea.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22634

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:55 pm

Yeah, sad but true.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22658

MrSelf · Post by **MrSelf** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:56 pm

It's not sad, it's a natural progression. Learn your history and quit being afraid of the future.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22727

manadren · Post by **manadren** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:36 pm

It may be natural progression, but I don't think that's it's something to be happily embraced without a second thought. When the world revolves around ideas, owned ideas, the question becomes who owns those ideas and to what end?

Maybe I'm behind the times, but I'm not looking forward to a day when my every thought comes with a license agreement.

But back to the topic at hand. Let's try a little theoretical situation here. Let's say your neighbor has some kinda of genetically modified and patented plant on his property - it's his right, he followed EULA or whatever. Lets say that plant, like plants often do, grew a few seeds. Then let's say some of those seeds ended up on your lawn, via some woodland creature or the wind or something. Let's say the conditions were right and all that and the seeds started to grow into the plant, taking root on your lawn. Now your hands never touched this thing, you didn't even know your neighbor had a patented plant. Now here's the question, should you have to trust the company that owns the copyright not to sue you for copyright infringement?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22740

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 8:09 pm

That is a scary thought, an evil company looking for extra cash could easly go around and looking for these accidents and sue people over it. I don't know what patent offices are doing recently though, it seems more and more stupid patents come along. Next thing you know some dude will patent binary and all comptuers in the world will now belong to him. Scary thing is, it's possible, it would just cost allot of money.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22748

Stasi · Post by **Stasi** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:00 pm

manadren wrote: It may be natural progression, but I don't think that's it's something to be happily embraced without a second thought. When the world revolves around ideas, owned ideas, the question becomes who owns those ideas and to what end?

Maybe I'm behind the times, but I'm not looking forward to a day when my every thought comes with a license agreement.

But back to the topic at hand. Let's try a little theoretical situation here. Let's say your neighbor has some kinda of genetically modified and patented plant on his property - it's his right, he followed EULA or whatever. Lets say that plant, like plants often do, grew a few seeds. Then let's say some of those seeds ended up on your lawn, via some woodland creature or the wind or something. Let's say the conditions were right and all that and the seeds started to grow into the plant, taking root on your lawn. Now your hands never touched this thing, you didn't even know your neighbor had a patented plant. Now here's the question, should you have to trust the company that owns the copyright not to sue you for copyright infringement?

The case in your hypothetical would probably get dismissed.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22758

Stasi · Post by **Stasi** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:01 pm

Red Squirrel wrote: That is a scary thought, an evil company looking for extra cash could easly go around and looking for these accidents and sue people over it. I don't know what patent offices are doing recently though, it seems more and more stupid patents come along. Next thing you know some dude will patent binary and all comptuers in the world will now belong to him. Scary thing is, it's possible, it would just cost allot of money.

No, patenting binary will not happen.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22759

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:04 pm

No kidding, too much prior art.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1650, old post ID:22761