Very good news thank you for posting this a Flag and star for you mate

Monsanto's push to sue people whose crops have been contaminated with Monsanto's GMs is madness. Not only does it do untold damage to farmer's livelihood it also does massive damage to the world's stores of heirloom varieties. I am glad to see this corporation put in its place, I hope too that it is only the first of many blows that puts this monster on it's ass.

Originally posted by Long Lance
why do we need an irrational poster who's trumpeting the harmlessness of glyphosphate? (roundup)

Disinformation runs rampant on this site. Luckily, those posters are so easy to spot, it's like they're running around with big red targets on their chest.

Hopefully that giant Monsanto hits the ground hard when it falls.

Really good news indeed.

I can't wait to see the company that tries to get a patent to "life itself" go down.

Originally posted by starcraft
Chemophobia....The IRRATIONAL fear of chemicals.

I'm a soil scientist...careful with the broad, irrational statements based on ignorance. Chemophobia with its' basis in misinformation and paranoia is not treatable with knowledge and common sense unfortunately. I won't respond any more. Arguing with these folks is quite unfair, they're not equipped.

FYI...you can't "kill" soil....LOL. You can destroy soil structure, through mismanagement, but chemicals have nothing to do with it.

Whole and entirely truthful, I have starred all your posts in this thread.

These people are no better than the religious zealots who refuse medical treatment for their children.

No zealot is a good zealot.

This post's headline is actually very misleading. If you'd dig a little deeper, you'd find the story is much more complicated and in fact the whole issue was started as an intellectual property case. It was Monsanto that originally sued Schmeiser.

(From a yahoo search)
Monsanto v. Schmeiser: A “Classic David and Goliath” Story?

by Clark Wolf, Director of Bioethics


Percy Schmeiser has become a folk hero of sorts. His story has quite literally become the stuff of legend and song, and he has been honored with awards from several groups that see him as a champion who stood up to a large multi-national corporation. Schmeiser is a Canadian farmer who was sued by Monsanto for violation of their intellectual property rights in the Roundup Ready™ canola he raised in his fields. Schmeiser didn’t purchase the Roundup Ready canola that was found growing on his land. Apparently the parent stock blew in from the road or from a neighboring field. When Schmeiser collected seed and saved it to plant in the following year, Monsanto’s gene was present in the saved seed and was thus present in Schmeiser’s canola. Tests identified the presence of Monsanto’s intellectual property in Schmeiser’s crop, and since he had not purchased the seed from Monsanto and had no license to use their patented Roundup Ready technology, Monsanto brought suit against Schmeiser in the Canadian court system. On appeal, the case rose all the way to Canada’s Supreme Court, which delivered its ruling on May 21, 2004. In spite of the fact that Monsanto’s patented genes had apparently drifted onto Schmeiser’s field, the court found in favor of Monsanto. In a five to four decision, they ruled that Percy Schmeiser violated Monsanto’s intellectual property rights by growing Roundup Ready canola without a license. For this reason, Monsanto v. Schmeiser has been represented as implying that farmers can be held liable for the unintentional and adventitious presence of patented material in their fields. In this case, since Schmeiser never used Roundup® to clear the weeds in his field, the court found that no damages were due to Monsanto. Both sides in the legal battle declared victory and retreated to their respective corners to nurse their wounds.

The article the OP links, other than being very poorly written and hard to understand, is very slanted.

This really seems to be good news for a change. I'm sorry if this has already been answered, but does this reverse the decisions already made against farmers? The ones who inadvertantly were growing Monsanto GM crops and got sued for it?

I find Monsanto's case to be bordering on moronic. How can a farmer be sued for cross polinating of plants??? Just how is any farmer going to stop bees and animals from dragging polen into the fields they live in? How does Monsanto expect to stop they're product from doing the same to other strains of the same crop? Mosanto has done some amazing things to make farming easier and more productive, but this is ludicrous. They are ignoring the very nature they presume to advance!


Zindo

Unfortunately, I doubt that much can be done about the heirloom seed lines that Monsanto has been able to get destroyed after their 'genetics' were found in farmers plots. Because the farmers did not have permission from Monsanto they were able to get the courts to force the farmers to incinerate entire crops because of possible contamination.

Hopefully Percy, and the other farmers like him who have been affected, hid away some of their heirloom seeds. I doubt you can quantify the loss in monetary damages, but when a blight hits the uniform genetics of Monsanto products, we will be screwed if we don't have something else to plant.

It warms my heart to hear this news.
DocMoreau

Originally posted by marg6043

But this thread is actually on the Genetic contamination and is impact on other farmers fields, be purposely or just negligent.

I think the most important issue of all concerning Monsanto's Round-up Ready GMO crops is the fact that these seeds, in effect have a TERMINATOR gene within. This means if the crop does NOT receive it's required Round-up spray; it will not develop to fruitation whatsoever.

This is the real evil of Monsanto's global food control plan. They are currently buying up en mass every seed company on the planet. When these seeds are introduced to the Terminator gene, the real repercussions will being.

Natural farmers, indigenous farmers, organic farmers, peasant farmers, anyone who didn't sign a contract with Monsanto; will all be at risk of having their crops eradicated via Monsanto's cross pollination.

Once being successfully cross pollinated, these crops will REQUIRE the farmer to buy Round-up spray, thus becoming dependent and ultimately indebted.

I can't stress enough the importance of the Terminator gene factor. Whether the lawsuit was won or not may have little longstanding implication on the AMAZING seed company buy-up Monsanto is engaging..

I know the Supreme Court is now citing legal precedent in law outside of the US, but I was wondering if a Canadian case like this would could be used in an American legal proceding as a cited precedent?

If anyone can shed light on that, it would be great to know.

Starcraft, just face the reality of the big picture. For anyone that wants to live in a natural, healthy and abundant world, corporations like monsanto, and especially monsanto, have to be destroyed. I'm sorry if that puts you out of a job, but it's for the greater good.

And there is nothing irational about fearing chemical contamination of our foodstocks or for not trusting a scientist. Scientists are often wrong and almost always short sighted and unable to think through all the complex correlations in nature, which usually results in an elephant in a china shop solution to a problem.

The quality of our global food supply is decreasing and the main reason is industrialized agriculture based on chemical fertilization and sterilization. Biological agriculture, even if done in industrial structures, could pick up the slack and we would be able to easily feed the world.