91–100 of 144 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Essentially all commercial apple trees are grafted and don't reproduce true to seed. Been this way for almost a century now.
Them doing it for a certain amount of time does not make it any less egregious. I'm not sure if you're just stating fact or wanting to use it as a rebuttal. I hope the former.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, there should be no excess that needs to be disposed. if you produce excess you should reduce production.
A state of "excess production" can only be determined long after production parameters have already been committed to. Yields, logistics costs, and market capacity aren't knowable ahead of time.
regardless of how the contract is structured, no contract should allow or force a producer to throw products away. this is similar to a law in the EU that forbids producers or distributors of clothing to destroy products they don't want to sell. once you plant a tree to grow fruit you should be allowed to keep harvesting that tree until its natural end. if there is an exclusive contract then the contract must not be…
The optimal quantity of discarded food is not zero.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, and there is a special place in hell reserved for anyone involved in designing food crops that can’t reproduce.
Essentially all commercial apple trees are grafted and don't reproduce true to seed. Been this way for almost a century now.
Patents on food crops, even genetically engineered ones, are evil. ALL our staple food crops and most non staples are genetically engineered by millennia of cultivation and selective breeding; CRISPR is just a fancy mechanism for what we’ve always done to food. Regulations that prevent farmers from selling food that is safe, are evil. It doesn’t matter how well intentioned the regulation is. Any government functionar…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Despite what everyone is assuming, this case doesn't depend on patents. The farmer entered into an agreement with another company and they're locked in a legal battle about that agreement. > Fresno County Superior Court Judge Jon Skiles in May ruled that Giumarra’s breach of contract claim can go forward, saying that the agreement between Giumarra and Mora is valid whether there is a patent for the fruit or not. > “T…
Correct, many people get worked up over the idea of the patents that could be in play here; plenty of good reason when that is a consideration. The court has already decided that the existence of a patent or licensing agreement is not relevant; It’s a contract dispute.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you bar a contract for the productivity of a tree for a given period of time, with a clause dictating how excess produce is to be disposed of?
yes, there should be no excess that needs to be disposed. if you produce excess you should reduce production.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? How? Has Monsanto used its termination patents?
>> These people are evil. > So you want to kill them? If you're being serious, saying "there is a special place in hell" does not equal "let's send them there".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> These people are evil. > So you want to kill them? If you're being serious, saying "there is a special place in hell" does not equal "let's send them there".
True, he's not suggesting that they be sent prematurely, just that they should endure eternal torture afterwards. That seems harsh for growing a seedless grape.
> Said of a person whom one considers to be especially wicked, evil, malevolent, etc. Often used facetiously or sarcastically.
From: https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/there's+a+special+place...
So they're not really saying this either:
> just that they should endure eternal torture afterwards
They're really just saying, "these people are evil/wicked".