Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

worldsensorium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 371 posts

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#51

Post by Workaccount2 »

cnity wrote: post #28
tptacek wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, he got sued by the patent holding company for using those seeds and then spraying them with Roundup , which would have killed off his crop had they not been the patented seeds. This is true of all the cases of people being sued for cultivating "Roundup-Ready" crops: the story they want to tell is that they were sued for cultivating seeds that accidentally wound up on their fields, but the facts established at tri…

God forbid the farmers benefit for free in some way from the unpredictable and uncontrollable pollination of a plant genetically engineered to be a highly successful cultivar. I'm not attacking you here, but the logic decided by the courts may be lawful but it is not moral (in my opinion). It's as if a noisy neighbour hosts a late night party and you happen to enjoy the music. The neighbour notices and decides to cha…

But look at the flip side where the court ruled the farmer cannot be liable for a plant naturally spreading into his field (and the farmer upon learning this using the specific herbicide meant for that specific plant strain). You now have precedent that if the plant "accidentally" (wink wink) spreads to your field you are not liable for the cost of the plant

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#52

Post by mschuster91 »

randomdata wrote: post #38
mschuster91 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want on my field as long as I don't use pesticides or processing that has been banned by law, without anyone being allowed to sue me for that.

As a farmer with experience growing roundup-ready crops: In order to obtain roundup-ready seeds you have to sign a contract with the vender. In said agreement, you agree to not do such things. If you want to do whatever you want with your field, don't enter into contractual agreements where you agree to follow certain rules.

> As a farmer with experience growing roundup-ready crops: In order to obtain roundup-ready seeds you have to sign a contract with the vender. In said agreement, you agree to not do such things.

The farmer had not entered into any contract with anyone, that is the point. It's not his fault if pollen from his neighbor's field entered his field, even if they contained "patented" technology.

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#53

Post by andruby »

epistasis wrote: post #14

Cool and all, but there's not a single mention of "hybrid" on the entire page, which means that this is not targeted at the majority of, say, US agriculture. The general public does not understand agriculture well, and I've noticed that this misunderstanding is stronger among those that have huge huge concerns about seeds and GMOs. Hybridization is a huge benefit, one of the primary reasons to use seeds from somebody…

I didn't know about hybrid seeds:

"In agriculture and gardening, hybrid seed is produced by deliberately cross-pollinated plants which are genetically diverse"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_seed

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#54

Post by xedrac »

tptacek wrote: post #22
luoc wrote: post #20

I remember, there was a case where a farmer grew patented plants on his field. They spread to his neighbours field who then got sued by the patent holding company for not licensing that plant. My memory is a bit fuzzy here but you get the idea. Now, how about reversing that? Think of a GPL-like licensed plant that makes all derived plants also inheriting that license. Legally poisoning the binary distribution format…

No, he got sued by the patent holding company for using those seeds and then spraying them with Roundup , which would have killed off his crop had they not been the patented seeds. This is true of all the cases of people being sued for cultivating "Roundup-Ready" crops: the story they want to tell is that they were sued for cultivating seeds that accidentally wound up on their fields, but the facts established at tri…

What is a farmer to do when mother nature infects his crop, against his will, with pollen from the GMO crop? I think the lawsuit should go the other way. Monsanto should pay for destroying the ability to grow heirloom seeds without getting infected. They want to keep it protected? Then require it to be grown in quarantine.

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#55

Post by burkaman »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #51
cnity wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

God forbid the farmers benefit for free in some way from the unpredictable and uncontrollable pollination of a plant genetically engineered to be a highly successful cultivar. I'm not attacking you here, but the logic decided by the courts may be lawful but it is not moral (in my opinion). It's as if a noisy neighbour hosts a late night party and you happen to enjoy the music. The neighbour notices and decides to cha…

But look at the flip side where the court ruled the farmer cannot be liable for a plant naturally spreading into his field (and the farmer upon learning this using the specific herbicide meant for that specific plant strain). You now have precedent that if the plant "accidentally" (wink wink) spreads to your field you are not liable for the cost of the plant

Your logic would apply to all seeds, right? If you have any plant on your property and you can't provide a receipt for its seed or conclusively prove that a bird dropped the seed, you should be convicted of theft.

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#56

Post by efitz »

Most people support patents because they have this romanticized notion of some little guy in his garage inventing the next light bulb. That’s not representative of the mass offensive and defensive patterns of use by modern corporations.

We should just end patents, period.

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#57

Post by pydry »

epistasis wrote: post #14

Cool and all, but there's not a single mention of "hybrid" on the entire page, which means that this is not targeted at the majority of, say, US agriculture. The general public does not understand agriculture well, and I've noticed that this misunderstanding is stronger among those that have huge huge concerns about seeds and GMOs. Hybridization is a huge benefit, one of the primary reasons to use seeds from somebody…

>The general public does not understand agriculture well, and I've noticed that this misunderstanding is stronger among those that have huge huge concerns about seeds and GMOs.

This is Monsanto's most frequent talking point.

They're very emphatic that GMO foods designed to survive being doused in massive amounts of roundup are completely safe (true) before they are sprayed with massive amounts of the (carcinogenic*) roundup.

The "objectors are ignorant anti science types" with the subtle mislead renders it an extraordinarily effective talking point.

* https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/roundup-ingredient-proba...

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#58

Post by RajT88 »

cnity wrote: post #28
tptacek wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, he got sued by the patent holding company for using those seeds and then spraying them with Roundup , which would have killed off his crop had they not been the patented seeds. This is true of all the cases of people being sued for cultivating "Roundup-Ready" crops: the story they want to tell is that they were sued for cultivating seeds that accidentally wound up on their fields, but the facts established at tri…

God forbid the farmers benefit for free in some way from the unpredictable and uncontrollable pollination of a plant genetically engineered to be a highly successful cultivar. I'm not attacking you here, but the logic decided by the courts may be lawful but it is not moral (in my opinion). It's as if a noisy neighbour hosts a late night party and you happen to enjoy the music. The neighbour notices and decides to cha…

The ability to patent life itself is a dangerous one.

Imagine where these precedents lead when inevitably we start genetically engineering people. If you yourself carry genes engineered by a biotech firm (cancer resistance or laser eye beams, you can pick according to whim), do you have to pay them royalties when you have children?

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#59

Post by dfxm12 »

cnity wrote: post #28
tptacek wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, he got sued by the patent holding company for using those seeds and then spraying them with Roundup , which would have killed off his crop had they not been the patented seeds. This is true of all the cases of people being sued for cultivating "Roundup-Ready" crops: the story they want to tell is that they were sued for cultivating seeds that accidentally wound up on their fields, but the facts established at tri…

God forbid the farmers benefit for free in some way from the unpredictable and uncontrollable pollination of a plant genetically engineered to be a highly successful cultivar. I'm not attacking you here, but the logic decided by the courts may be lawful but it is not moral (in my opinion). It's as if a noisy neighbour hosts a late night party and you happen to enjoy the music. The neighbour notices and decides to cha…

the logic decided by the courts may be lawful but it is not moral (in my opinion).

Doubly so when you consider that the patent holding company (like Monsanto) has a lot of ability to affect legislation and the (presumably) independent farmer has next to none. The issues here are systemic and not limited to big ag.

Re: “Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers

#60

Post by exhilaration »

COGlory wrote: post #46
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #37

Article really lacks specifics. The reason so much of the USA grows “patented” seeds is because they’re created specifically to be sprayed with herbicide and not die. There’s no alternative to to patented seeds without making fundamental changes to agriculture practices. Hybrid seeds are also different than open-pollinated in that the children do not grow true to parent. Even if we removed the patents, they wouldn’t…

1) There are multiple herbicides and multiple pesticides and different ways to skin a cat, not all of which are patented, or for many, the patents have expired. 2) Your second point is more applicable. Who is going to grow these seeds? People underestimate how much agriculture is devoted solely to seed crops.

People underestimate how much agriculture is devoted solely to seed crops

Can you explain this further? I never thought about where seeds come from. Are there giant Bayer-owned fields devoted to growing seeds?

Post reply on HN