Roger Whitehead wrote:
> In article <36BCECC4.9A034CF3 at mr.net>, David Kendra wrote:
> > Selling the seed without compensating the company
> > is stealing.
>> If they are, in fact, the owners, of course. What is the law on intellectual
> property in genetic manipulation? (There are, of course, some latter-day
> Proudhons who would argue that intellectual property, particularly of such a
> kind, is itself theft.)
I thought the discussion was about traditional, non-GM seed. When did we switch
to GM seed? If the genetically modified gene and technology is patented, and a
grower decided to make and sell seed which he illegally obtained by producing it
him/herself without compensating the owners of the patents, then yes I think
that is stealing as well. My original comment which you snipped "You invested
only in growing the crop, not developing the variety. The company you
originally bought the seed from still owns the right to the genetics, not you.
Selling the seed without compensating the company is stealing." still applies.
> > I don't know if selling stolen seed is illegal in Canada, but I
> > personally believe it should be.
>> So you're willing to support Monsanto's actions in publicising the names of
> these farmers without even knowing whether it has the law on its side. No
> wonder you cannot see a moral dimension to this act.
Please dont make claims for me, that is hightly unprofessional. I personally do
not like Monsanto nor it's tactics. I do believe; however, fair compensation
for a product. If Monsanto developed and marketed a technology then they should
be compensated for it. Sorry if you have a problem with the laws as currently
written, maybe you should take that up with your elected officials.