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

5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

readersupportednews.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 225 posts

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#81

Post by Maxious »

colanderman wrote: post #75
Create wrote: post #31

"On May 10, the Summer Olympics were inaugurated at the Greek birthplace of the ancient games. A few days before, virtually unnoticed, the government of Vietnam addressed a letter to the International Olympic Committee expressing the "profound concerns of the Government and people of Viet Nam about the decision of IOC to accept the Dow Chemical Company as a global partner sponsoring the Olympic Movement." Dow provide…

Maybe I'm thick, but I don't see what Dow has to do with Monsanto or this story?

"[Agent Orange] was manufactured for the U.S. Department of Defense primarily by Monsanto Corporation and Dow Chemical."

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#82

Post by vollmarj »

This article is wildly emotional and certainly doesn't reflect the situation here in the US. Sure Monsanto and the other seed companies have been driving up the prices of seed. Farmers of course don't like that, but farmers do like the higher yields they get by using those GMO seeds. There are lots of things Monsanto does that might seem "evil", but this article is just ridiculous. Please don't use it as a basis to form your own opinions. You will just sound silly.

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#83

Post by Karunamon »

ytru877 wrote: post #13
latch wrote: post #8

This may be naive, but why isn't the market protecting farmers? Are subsidies involved? Why don't they just use normal seeds or other seeds? Weren't these limitations known ahead of time? Why did the farmers make a deal with the devil? Why can't they switch back?

It seems like a hit piece. There's no reference to it in any major publication. I have no idea how this politically-charged website and article got on HN.

I'm not seeing a problem. Check the hyperlinks in the article, they go to more reputable orgs.

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#84

Post by peterwwillis »

ramchip wrote: post #73
peterwwillis wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Vietnam is opposed to a company sponsoring the Olympics because they made a product that the USA used to deform and kill their people. How does that make sense? Shouldn't they be angry at the country that actually dumped the chemicals on them? If somebody gets a gun and shoots you, you sue the guy who shot you, not the company that made the bullets. (Well, unless you just want more money, which in our litigious so…

It's more like someone selling a case of bullets while knowing that the buyer will use it to kill someone . I can't say if it's legal or not, but it's certainly not very ethical.

This has got to be the most naive statement i've ever read on the internet.

First of all, it's not illegal to sell arms to your own government's military, and the whole point of the military buying them is to kill people with. (Sorry, "defend our freedom")

Second, products aren't manufactured just for fun. They're made so someone can buy them and use them. The market's demands are the reason the product exists. So if you don't like the product, you have to direct your attentions to the market for the product, not the manufacturers or salespeople. You can get mad at the salesmen all you want - they'll still just collect their big fat paycheck and the market will keep on killing people. Assuming it's the killing and maiming you don't like, I highly recommend you get angry at the USA and not Dow, since the USA is the reason Dow invented and sold chemicals to begin with.

You can call Dow unethical if you want - they don't give a shit. And it is completely meaningless in the context of wanting people to stop getting hurt.

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#85

Post by Tichy »

knieveltech wrote: post #72
Tichy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then that seems to be a flaw in the law system. Still, even if they don't start it, why would the company win frivolous claims?

Surely you don't think that frivolous claims are never won?

Not sure, certainly they shouldn't be won as a rule. Maybe there are exceptions, but it shouldn't be just a case of whoever hires the most expensive lawyers wins.

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#86

Post by peterwwillis »

colanderman wrote: post #78
freehunter wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might make a bit more sense when you add in that Agent Orange wasn't supposed to cause these effects in humans. Dow and Monstanto were struggling to keep up with the demand from the US military and quality control suffered. This led to Agent Orange being contaminated with TCDD (2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin). True Agent Orange should be 50/50 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D. It was the contamination with the carcinogen that…

guns aren't made or sold with specific intent to kill people. So handguns and machine guns are manufactured for deer hunters?

You know, i've always wondered why some targets for target practice show a humanoid form... y'know, if people aren't practicing to shoot other people. Maybe they were trying to paint a deer and got confused.

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#87

Post by vecinu »

jaysonelliot wrote: post #69
skosuri wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used that case because it's the most famous one people refer too. Runyon is another famous person. Look, I've watched Food Inc too. Again, show me the case (which I believe does not exist). You showed me a news article. Otherwise this is just someone who has been in a bunch of movies and is suing Monsanto, and is not really an unbiased source (just like I don't link directly to Monsanto's website on the Runyons.)

I don't know what level of evidence would satisfy you, as you seem to have a pre-existing bias against the farmers' claims. Monsanto attempted to sue, then dropped its case against the Runyons. Given Monsanto's otherwise litigious history, and the damage that would be done to the company if they were to lose a case like this in court, the evidence points in favor of the farmer. Statements like "I believe (any case) d…

I don't necessarily agree with your stance because you still haven't materialized official court cases dealing with this issue.

I would like to see a case where Monsanto was sued for seed contamination and the farmer won the case.

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#88

Post by brazzy »

jackalope wrote: post #79
skosuri wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is his claim. It doesn't make much sense. Why would he spray his entire crop with roundup? Even if it were true, he still knowingly was getting RoundUp Ready seeds to avoid paying Monsanto. That's somewhat like saying: "I found this copy of adobe photoshop on this used computer.. I copied it and sold it; since i didn't originally purchase it, I'm not responsible." A quote from the Canadian Supreme Court: "Mr. Sc…

If your bulls raid my pasture and attack and rape my cows, I might shoot them and even have a barbecue. There's no reason I can't raise the calves as my own. Who cares what Schmeiser did to the plants GROWING ON HIS OWN LAND? Why must he explain his reasons to anyone for dealing with a predatory invader?

That's a good argument against the patentability of genetically modified plants, but not against the validity of the case given that GM plants currently ARE patentable.

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#89

Post by CWuestefeld »

colanderman wrote: post #78
freehunter wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might make a bit more sense when you add in that Agent Orange wasn't supposed to cause these effects in humans. Dow and Monstanto were struggling to keep up with the demand from the US military and quality control suffered. This led to Agent Orange being contaminated with TCDD (2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin). True Agent Orange should be 50/50 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D. It was the contamination with the carcinogen that…

guns aren't made or sold with specific intent to kill people. So handguns and machine guns are manufactured for deer hunters?

I own a handgun, given to me as a hand-me-down, that was originally used for small game hunting.

Re: 5 Million Farmers Sue Monsanto for $7.7 Billion

#90

Post by jcgillespie »

I don't understand why Monsanto is vilified for enforcing the licensing agreements that farmers willingly enter into when they buy the seed?

When you buy the seed, they tell you straight up that you can't replant. And I'm not a farmer (grew up in farming community), but I don't think this is unique to GMO crops either. I believe the same thing happens for "conventional" hybrid crops from breeding.

Post reply on HN