“Open source” seeds loosen Big Ag’s grip on farmers • Hacker News Board

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

#111

Post by quantified » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

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…

The farmers were not trying to grow the patented seeds. They shouldn't be liable for their neighbor's trash blowing on their fields.

The use of Roundup is another travesty.

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

#112

Post by sethjgore » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

HDThoreaun wrote: post #86

efitz wrote: post #56

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.

Patented seeds have funded GMO research which has saved literally hundreds of millions if not billions of lives through famine reduction. Yes it sucks for farmers, but I can't see how it has been anything other than absolute boon for humanity.

Absolute boon for “humanity” is a such abstract notion. The reality is that farmers are robbed and food we eat are way less nutrient dense, etc etc. boon…for whom?

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

#113

Post by epistasis » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:42 PM UTC

pydry wrote: post #57

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*)…

I don't understand, is the talking point what you quotes from me, or their taking point about GMOs?

Because I don't think what you quoted, or my comment in general, is a Monsanto taking point, and I don't understand the connection to Monsanto that you are trying to make.

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

#114

Post by alphanullmeric » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:43 PM UTC

efitz wrote: post #56

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.

End intellectual “property” in general. Unfortunately resistance seems to be coming from artists and the like just as much as big corporations.

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

#115

Post by tptacek » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:45 PM UTC

ladyattis wrote: post #48

pfdietz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That patents genes spread lightly onto his field didn't give him a "get out of patent free card" to then concentrate those genes by spraying the field with herbicide. The courts properly understood that intent and actions matter here. The farmer was in the wrong and justice was done.

It just demonstrates how patents are a form of rent seeking. You own the product of your labor but you should not be able to assume you own the accidental products that are related to your labor (ex. buying tools from a tool smith which then you use to make your own tool smithy).

There is no way that analogy holds in this case. The farmer didn't cultivate their own RoundUp to spray, among other problems with it.

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

#116

Post by tptacek » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:45 PM UTC

burkaman wrote: post #55

Workaccount2 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, you can't.

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

#117

Post by Vt71fcAqt7 » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:45 PM UTC

efitz wrote: post #56

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.

I'm not sure that it's so clear cut. I think we should be more strict with accepting new patents however wrt prior work and extending them. Companies should be able to ignore patents as soon as they find prior work. Then it should become the responsibility of the patent holder to prove that there really isn't prior work. And there really shouldn't be a way to extend patents easily if at all. Patents are also benneficial in that they serve as a database of sorts of new discoveries (with pictures!). I can point to the exact US patent of the field effect transistor,[0] for example.

[0]https://patents.google.com/patent/US1745175A/en

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

#118

Post by jimbob45 » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:45 PM UTC

HDThoreaun wrote: post #86

efitz wrote: post #56

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.

Patented seeds have funded GMO research which has saved literally hundreds of millions if not billions of lives through famine reduction. Yes it sucks for farmers, but I can't see how it has been anything other than absolute boon for humanity.

>Bad thing is good because it funded good thing

I’m not sure your reasoning makes sense to me.

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

#119

Post by Metacelsus » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:46 PM UTC

emadehsan wrote: post #101

> The farmers saved a percentage of the seeds and sowed them again the next spring. However, this is not a lucrative model for profit-oriented multinational companies, since the seed breeders only earn a profit during the first sale and not again every year. Was the "inability of the produced seeds to be sowed again and turn into a crop" intentionally baked into the seeds sold by these companies, purely for profits?…

Nearly all modern crops are hybrid strains, which means the offspring won't have the same genotype as the parents. This is the real reason why re-planting doesn't work well. It's not anything nefarious.

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

#120

Post by SQueeeeeL » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 4:49 PM UTC

wnevets wrote: post #102

efitz wrote: post #56

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.

Patents are still being used to protect smaller companies from much larger corporations. Allowing these large corporations to legally ignore patents will only make things worse for the rest of us. If we need to reform patents, maybe it should be based on revenue generated. Once a company has been successfully "incentivized" for their "innovation" the patent expires sooner.

>Patents are still being used to protect smaller companies from much larger corporations. Allowing these large corporations to legally ignore patents will only make things worse for the rest of us.

Truly small operations don't have the bandwidth or resources to even file for a patent. So it's pretty much only medium sized companies or those with the backing of powerful groups who take advantage of the patent system.