Bowman vs Monsanto, genetically modified soybean case

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jack21222
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the legal and ethical implications of genetically modified (GM) crops, particularly focusing on the patenting of GM soybeans by companies like Monsanto. Participants explore the consequences of patent laws on farmers, the potential for cross-pollination with organic crops, and the historical context of corporate personhood and biological patents.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that patent laws pose a greater risk to the food supply than the safety of GM foods themselves, citing the case of Vernon Bowman who was sued for planting commodity soybeans that were likely GM due to cross-pollination.
  • Others highlight the issue of cross-pollination between GM crops and organic crops, noting that this can complicate the farming practices of those who wish to maintain organic standards.
  • A participant discusses the historical evolution of corporate rights and how it parallels the ability to patent biological entities, suggesting that this has led to monopolistic practices in the biotech industry.
  • Some participants draw parallels between the Bowman case and the Schmeiser case in Canada, where a farmer faced legal issues for using patented seeds without permission.
  • There are calls for the Supreme Court to recognize the implications of allowing a company to claim patents on all generic soybeans, which some view as a troubling precedent.
  • Several participants emphasize the need for appropriate sourcing of claims made in the discussion, pointing to the importance of evidence in debates about corporate practices and patent laws.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the implications of patent laws and corporate practices, with no clear consensus reached. Some agree on the problematic nature of patenting biological entities, while others focus on specific legal cases as examples of broader issues.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical legal precedents and the evolution of corporate personhood, indicating that the discussion is influenced by complex legal and ethical considerations surrounding patents and biotechnology.

  • #61
Averagesupernova said:
Did he notify them whether or not he will be spraying with Roundup thus fully utilizing the GMO traits in the crop or will he take care of weed control using pre-Roundup methods?

Yes he did use roundup and he did tell Mosanto reps. Not only that he planted subsequent second crops using seed he saved from the original crop grown with commodity seed.


http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20121012/EDIT07/310129998/1021/EDIT
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #62
I'd say he is going down.
 
  • #63
Averagesupernova said:
I'd say he is going down.


It looks like it. The weird thing is that he has probably spent more to defend himself than he would have had to pay Monsanto.
 

Similar threads

News U.S. Supreme Court Hears Monsanto Seed Patent Case
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
13K
Monsanto files patent for new invention: the pig
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K