APP - monsanto v organic farmers, monsanto wins and we lose

Don Quixote

cancer survivor
Contributor
once more the gmo franken food giant monsanto wins over organic gardeners

By Carey Gillam
(Reuters) - Monsanto Co. on Monday won another round in a legal battle with U.S. organic growers as an appeals court threw out the growers' efforts to stop the company from suing farmers if traces of its patented biotech genes are found in crops.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a previous ruling that found organic growers had no reason to try to block Monsanto from suing them as the company had pledged it would not take them to court if biotech crops accidentally mix in with organics.
Organic farmers and others have worried for years that they will be sued by Monsanto for patent infringement if their crops get contaminated with Monsanto biotech crops.
In its ruling Monday, the appellate court said the organic growers must rely on Monsanto assurances on the company's website that it will not sue them so long as the mix is very slight.
"Monsanto's binding representations remove any risk of suit against the appellants as users or sellers of trace amounts (less than one percent) of modified seed," the court stated in its ruling.
Monsanto officials applauded the ruling.
"The assertion that Monsanto would pursue patent infringement against farmers that have no interest in using the company's patented seed technology was hypothetical from the outset," the company said in a statement issued Monday.
Monsanto has developed a reputation for zealously defending patents on its genetically altered crops, which include patented "Roundup Ready" soybeans, corn and cotton, genetically altered to tolerate treatments of its Roundup weedkiller.
The crops are widely used in the United States and Latin America. It has proven difficult to keep the genetic alteration from contaminating non-biotech crops, as recently occurred in a wheat field in the U.S. state of Oregon.
The group of more than 50 organic farmers and seed dealers sued Monsanto in March 2011 seeking to prohibit Monsanto from suing them if their seed and crops become contaminated.
Monsanto officials specifically refused to sign a covenant stating it would not sue the growers, but the court said the website statement was sufficient and would be binding.
Andrew Kimbrell, a lawyer with the Center for Food Safety, which joined as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said the decision made no sense.
"It is a very bizarre ruling that relies on a paragraph on a website," he said. "It is a very real threat to American farmers. This is definitely appealable."
In its ruling Monday, the court noted that records indicate a large majority of conventional seed samples have become contaminated by Monsanto's Roundup resistance trait.
Monsanto filed 144 patent-infringement lawsuits against farmers between 1997 and April 2010, and won judgments against farmers it said made use of its seed without paying required royalties.
Many U.S. farmers have said their fields were inadvertently contaminated with Monsanto's biotech seeds without their knowledge. The issue has been a topic of concern for not only farmers, but also companies that clean and handle seed.
(Reporting By Carey Gillam; editing by Andrew Hay)

http://news.yahoo.com/organic-growers-lose-decision-suit-versus-monsanto-over-185325630.html
 
Sometimes, capitalism takes a long time to work. S. Korea/Japan have now added their names to the list of countries that will no longer accept U.S wheat unless testing shows no sign of GMO. The list of countries that won't succumb to Monsanto bribery is growing. When it gets to the point that Monsanto can only destroy this nation, maybe we'll see a modicum of change.

On a lighter note....Frankenfood is NOT served in Monsanto cafeterias.
 
Sometimes, capitalism takes a long time to work. S. Korea/Japan have now added their names to the list of countries that will no longer accept U.S wheat unless testing shows no sign of GMO. The list of countries that won't succumb to Monsanto bribery is growing. When it gets to the point that Monsanto can only destroy this nation, maybe we'll see a modicum of change.

On a lighter note....Frankenfood is NOT served in Monsanto cafeterias.

a great amount of our food started out as something else (corn was originally maze), however, it evolved over time (sometimes with some help). 'franken' food is modified faster than we can predict what it will do and mutates in the fields. those mutations spread and we do not know what they have become...or will become.

yep, we have met the enemy and he is us
 
?????......how is this a loss for the organic growers instead of a win?.......
First...if you didn't redact the actually quote...that of 'less than 1%....you would see that it wasn't a blanket exception from Monsanto. Your question is silly. Organic growers don't want GMO seeds. As I've already posted...virtually every other country (save for those we have a stranglehold over) won't accept Monsanto food. You can lose 'organic' certification if your products don't test clean.

And there are myriad issues with Monsanto's products. We still don't know the effect some of the pollen has on bees. Monsanto bought one of the research companies that was doing the testing. We've already discussed the BT issue. Why would organic farmers want that DNA in their produce? They already have pest control taken care of.
 
a great amount of our food started out as something else (corn was originally maze), however, it evolved over time (sometimes with some help). 'franken' food is modified faster than we can predict what it will do and mutates in the fields. those mutations spread and we do not know what they have become...or will become.

yep, we have met the enemy and he is us
And the transgenic mutations would never occur in nature. Creating drought/blight resistant, or heat resistant crops is one thing. Creating poison resistant crops is another.

Other companies have created golden rice in the lab. So far, I see no downside to that creation. It isn't the process per se...it's the actual mutations that give me pause.
 
so monsanto can "create a crop" in the lab and when they fail to contai n what they created they can then SUE the guys whos crops they contaminated for patent infringement?


How in the hell is the world going to look when you cant even GROW your own food because monstanto has contaminated all crops and can sue you for feeding your self.


Im sure their "promise" not to sue anyone is very binding.


we all know money outranks words and promises to them
 
so monsanto can "create a crop" in the lab and when they fail to contai n what they created they can then SUE the guys whos crops they contaminated for patent infringement?


How in the hell is the world going to look when you cant even GROW your own food because monstanto has contaminated all crops and can sue you for feeding your self.


Im sure their "promise" not to sue anyone is very binding.


we all know money outranks words and promises to them
Yes...the issue seems to be the saving of the seed. So an organic farmer now has tainted seedstock, and not only can they be sued for patent infringement, Monsanto can't be sued for tainting the crops.
 
First...if you didn't redact the actually quote...that of 'less than 1%....you would see that it wasn't a blanket exception from Monsanto. Your question is silly. Organic growers don't want GMO seeds. As I've already posted...virtually every other country (save for those we have a stranglehold over) won't accept Monsanto food. You can lose 'organic' certification if your products don't test clean.

And there are myriad issues with Monsanto's products. We still don't know the effect some of the pollen has on bees. Monsanto bought one of the research companies that was doing the testing. We've already discussed the BT issue. Why would organic farmers want that DNA in their produce? They already have pest control taken care of.

my point was accurate.....the court said there was no need for an order prohibiting Monsanto from suing the organic farmers, since they have committed to not doing so.......

your point is that the organic farmers may have a claim against Monsanto.....they have not yet filed such a claim, nor are they prohibited from doing so......as far as the BT issue is concerned, if you aren't aware it has nothing to do with these crops, then there is nothing to be gained with discussing the issue with you.......
 
my point was accurate.....the court said there was no need for an order prohibiting Monsanto from suing the organic farmers, since they have committed to not doing so.......
You purposely redacted the language that qualifies Monsanto's promised claim. A claim on a website. If it is deemed that more than 1% of crops are tainted, or said crops contain more than 1% GMO dna, then Monsanto will indeed attempt to sue. Stop trying to muddy the waters.

your point is that the organic farmers may have a claim against Monsanto.....they have not yet filed such a claim, nor are they prohibited from doing so......as far as the BT issue is concerned, if you aren't aware it has nothing to do with these crops, then there is nothing to be gained with discussing the issue with you.......
Discussing anything with you is a waste of time. You have no idea what the 'issue' is.

As we speak, a class action suit has just been filed against Monsanto for tainting neighboring wheat.

Typically, Monsanto bankrupts farmers via litigation tactics. Perhaps a class action suit will have better results.

.....there is nothing in this situation that says Monsanto can't be sued and to pretend there is shows nothing except your ignorance......
Oh, they will be sued. History shows that big money typically wins. I believe the tides are changing.
 
so monsanto can "create a crop" in the lab and when they fail to contai n what they created they can then SUE the guys whos crops they contaminated for patent infringement?


How in the hell is the world going to look when you cant even GROW your own food because monstanto has contaminated all crops and can sue you for feeding your self.


Im sure their "promise" not to sue anyone is very binding.


we all know money outranks words and promises to them
Someone needs to sue Monsanto for contaminating an organic crop!
It s containment should be on Monsanto
 
Legally, "organic" has a specific meaning. The standards vary from country to country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_food#Legal_definition

The US and Canada both prohibit 100% organic food from containing GMO ingredients.
http://blogcritics.org/can-gmo-food-be-organic/

So legally, GMO food is not organic.
Organic is often more about the environment, than the food. When GMO corn is raised for seed stock, and a variety of herbicides/pesticides are used in the growing process....to claim the plants in future seasons are growing 'organically' is laughable.
 
Back
Top