Monsanto Tries to Patent & Control Natural, Non-GMO Tomatoes

a reply to: marg6043

Now the last drop, more deceptions to claim natural plants with special abilities as their own creation and manipulation

Where and when has Monsanto done that?

a reply to: Box of Rain

You would be correct that certain cultivars are patented and protected I believe. I used to work at a nursery. Various large brand master nurseries patent their own cultivar breeds. Look at your impatients next time you leave the nursery. They are trademarked. Not sure if trademarked and patented are the same thing. The cultivar the nursery breed so hard to get outstanding colors is protected from cloning. You would be breaking the law if you cloned your impatients or whatever else you bought that is trademarked or patented plant wise. Same for Roses. I think Jackson Perkins patents their roses to stop another nursery from growing their cultivar and calling it another name.

I think fruit trees are like this too by certain growers. Doesn't matter if 90% of their breeding work to create such a cultivar was actually done by Luther Burbank (for fruit trees at least) about 100 years ago.

a reply to: marg6043

Monsanto is the devil!!! Just stop eating gmo foods. Don't eat carpeting either.

a reply to: Phage

Well Phage you have asked so please read the references source, 20 percent already patented.

www.dailytech.com...

www.i-sis.org.uk...

Now as for patent I am not certain of the law in the state's but the idea of patenting something one has not invented or created is actually wrong on a whole raft of ethical matters, these people are not god they did not design the genome and they do not own the human race which is the essential heart of such an argument as if it is granted that is the future precedent of there claim weather they state such or not.

They do try to defend there actions but this is not columbus using ancient portolons to discover haiti or amerigo vespucci, or captain cook or neil armstrong planting flag's this is something that is obviously eminent domain, ethical property of the entire human race and they have NO right to claim ownership, BUT patent there RESEARCH for a limited time to charge royalty's for non medical uses (only) ok but ownership NO.

www.genome.gov...
news.bbc.co.uk...
digitalcommons.law.scu.edu...

I disagree vehemantly with some attitudes expressed in the white paper but it is good reference.

And without digging whom would these scientists work for if not he largest genome company on the planet whom would pay them the largest salary and whom would happily LICENCE the patent from there employee to keep there hands suspiciously clean.
enough said I believe.

a reply to: bbracken677

Don't eat carpet!!! burber is so much tastier and better for you. Better fiber.

a reply to: bbracken677

All this companies uses Monspanto products, they are "owned by monspanto".

fracturedparadigm.com...

a reply to: LABTECH767
Yes, I know of the attempts to patent human genes (not the same as a genome, btw, and not Monsanto). It has been ruled that it cannot be done.
www.scotusblog.com...

But I asked you what law Monsanto has circumvented and what natural genome has been patented by them. Contrary to the article in the OP, this patent circumvents no law and includes no patent on a gene or genome.

BUT patent there RESEARCH for a limited time to charge royalty's for non medical uses (only) ok but ownership NO.

From your first link:

It is therefore NHGRI s intent that human genomic DNA sequence data, generated by the projects funded under RFA HG-95-005, should be released as rapidly as possible and placed in the public domain where it will be freely available.

www.genome.gov...

And without digging whom would these scientists work for if not he largest genome company on the planet

Monsanto works on plants and they are not the largest genetic research company on the planet. That would probably be Novo Nordisk. They work with human genes and they are a whole lot larger than Monsanto.

a reply to: marg6043
Guess you're going to have to boycott a lot of farmers too.

a reply to: Phage

Thank's for setting me streight Phage, I acknowledge your point and suppose I just fell on the bandwagon as they do have a rotten reputation on the net, so like the blackwater rumor which I was taken in by they are not guilty here of this particular point.
I supposed I will have to reevalute my opinion on that point but there is no fire without fuel as the saying goes, still I suppose I was part of the lynch mob here and they never recieved a fair hearing from us.
You have set a good moral precedent on this point, I will Try to be more careful with my opinion's in future but as you pointed out a short attention span and all.
Night and god bless.

a reply to: LABTECH767
A lot of their reputation is well deserved.

Just because I like to sort through the nonsense and distortion does not mean I'm a whole hearted supporter. I just don't think lying and distorting the facts helps anyone. The article in the OP is typical of this.

a reply to: Phage

What does piss me off about some GMO foods is what they have tinkered with.

Wonder why tomatoes do not have that rich flavor they once had?

Because some wonder boy tinkered with the gene that controls ripening. They fixed it so that tomatoes will be an overall, pleasing red once ripe. Unfortunately they also screwed up the flavor gene.

The result is a pretty tomato that is weak on flavor.....give me the flavor and screw the appearance.

a reply to: awakehuman

GRRRRRR

GRRRRRR

AND TRIPLE GRRRRRR.

That pile of human garbage of an organization is one of the most treasonous, traitorous, destructive organizations in the history of man.

May God deal with them in His sure wisdom and decisive discipline.

Sigh.

originally posted by: Box of Rain
a reply to: awakehuman



I thought there were plant variety patents that had been issued for years -- even before GMOs.



I'm not saying it is right or wrong to patent these things, but I know that people for decades have been naturally cross-breeding certain varieties of plants (through processes such as grafting) to create higher-yielding, heartier, insect resistant, or blight resistant varieties -- AND patenting the results.



I'm not sure exactly how this is different from other natural cross-breeding of plants varieties.

Seriously?? Grafting isn't crossbreeding a plant. When you graft a peach tree onto an apple tree you don't get a fruit called a papple. You still get apples and peaches. There is nothing changed in the DNA of the species. You really need to educate yourself before you try to sound like you know something. If you can't comprehend the basic knowledge of the subject you shouldn't form any oppinions because you simply don't know.

crazy there needs to be a class action lawsuit againts monanto for all the damage they are doing

I'm not sure sure how all this works, but I use a lemon/water spray to keep the ants off my strawberry plants. I'm surprise we don't have natural ways to do it. Hmm, no money in it have it patent maybe.