Seeking Alpha

A dispute between an Indiana farmer and Monsanto (MON) over soybean seeds will be heard next...

A dispute between an Indiana farmer and Monsanto (MON) over soybean seeds will be heard next week at the Supreme Court. At issue is how long MON can claim patent protection for its genetically engineered seeds, but it isn't just the agriculture world that's nervous about the outcome. Microsoft (MSFT) and Apple (AAPL) have filed briefs saying a ruling against MON would "eviscerate" their patent protection.
Comments (20)
  • words
    , contributor
    Comments (76) | Send Message
     
    Patents should be granted for a reasonable time to reward the original creativity and repay the investment. However, patents should expire in a reasonable time to promote access and lower costs. To allow companies, persons or their estates prolonged grants while particularly those who had no hand in the original creativity is poor public policy and not unlike the Rule Against Perpetuities in property law having been imposed to promote the fair distribution of wealth.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:10 AM Reply Like
  • Topcat
    , contributor
    Comments (416) | Send Message
     
    MON: don't buy their stock..evil evil company destroying our agriculture and food safety...
    15 Feb 2013, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • rdumont99
    , contributor
    Comments (54) | Send Message
     
    I agree... as a conscientious investor it saddens me that one of my holdings is supporting MONster in court. Any company that will sue a farmer because a small percentage of crop was cross-seeded from a neighbouring farm, or that develops crops that don't germinate so 3rd world farmers have to buy seed every year rather than taking a portion of their mature crop to seed next year's crops - they're terrible, horrible, profit-hungry, agriculture-destroying monsters.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:25 PM Reply Like
  • Advill
    , contributor
    Comments (2194) | Send Message
     
    Nobody is forcing them to buy the MON seeds.... the natural breeding is not included in any patent violation of biological....which is a terrible failure of the patent law with many others.

     

    The problem is that we need a new law for biologicals, the current multi-parched one is from XIX century and was designed for "artifacts" not for living things that reproduce itself.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:33 PM Reply Like
  • Jeach!
    , contributor
    Comments (846) | Send Message
     
    @Advill:

     

    "Nobody is forcing them to buy the MON seeds..."

     

    Exactly, but because a farmer who doesn't want anything to do with MON seeds, has his fields located only a few KM from a farm who does use MON seeds... due to the natural behaviors of nature, the wind blows and this first farmer now has traces of the MON products in his own field.

     

    That's what's going on! And MON will sue the farmer to "pay up".

     

    Hell, all MON has to do is secretly have 'agents' go around a secretly seed into crop lands that don't want to deal with MON and then sue them a few years later.

     

    It's one thing to engineer crops, but it's another to sue because nature does it's thing.
    15 Feb 2013, 04:31 PM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3534) | Send Message
     
    Maybe Vringo can branch out and start trolling non-tech companies like MON for patents
    15 Feb 2013, 11:26 AM Reply Like
  • Longaapl1200
    , contributor
    Comments (20) | Send Message
     
    Patent laws are terrible. they only protect the side that has the most money to invest in the U.S. court system.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:52 AM Reply Like
  • Lake Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (198) | Send Message
     
    From your handle I would expect you would be in favor of patent protection!!

     

    I think the laws are about right. I think the patents on drugs could be a little longer as the drugs developed do wonders but they cost so much to develop. Of course, I"m jaded by my perspective as an investor in the drug and technology sector. Medicine would take a step back if patent protections were weakened. It's tough enough dealing with all the third world countries that allow blatant theft of technology.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • BradleyModLover
    , contributor
    Comments (102) | Send Message
     
    Yes, the entire patent system needs an overall. Many patents are issued by govt. workers who have no clue what that patent document entails. AND there is stuff that occurs naturally and/or has been commonly used for many years, that someone with a lawyer gets a patent and claims as their exclusive creation.

     

    Total B.S. In fact, the position of the original Apple system icon placements came right out of crew systems work by the US Air Force and used for crew systems for years before Apple claimed it as their 'interface design'. Yeah, it forced Microsoft to place icons on the left side of the screen. The USAF had years previously placed everything important on the right side, thumb and pointer finger for quickest, fastest access in human engineering. The govt. spent a lot developing the best positions for all the crew systems buttons, eject and all.

     

    Jobs saw that at DARPA and designed a GUI around it. Now it's hands off with patents! Ridiculous.
    15 Feb 2013, 03:46 PM Reply Like
  • fintax
    , contributor
    Comments (81) | Send Message
     
    You're nuts, chum. Without patent laws, there would be zero incentive to create and innovate. Do you actually want to go back to the Dark Ages?
    15 Feb 2013, 08:25 PM Reply Like
  • BradleyModLover
    , contributor
    Comments (102) | Send Message
     
    No, but like the tax code, the patent code is a pile of garbage and patents are given by clerks who know nothing about the patent they are patenting so only deep pockets with lawyers can protect themselves.
    16 Feb 2013, 06:19 PM Reply Like
  • vwahby
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    While I own Apple shares, Monsanto's use of GMO seed is nothing less than an attempt to control the world's food supply. The more you look into Monsanto, the more rotten it looks.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:22 PM Reply Like
  • Advill
    , contributor
    Comments (2194) | Send Message
     
    Monsanto is victim of the NGO´s that are attacking them since they develop the somatrophin for cows and later the super seeds.

     

    They have the right to develop new varieties of plants and they have the right to protect their effort...and they have the right to sell their products .....in the protection time that patents provide.

     

    Monsanto has been attacked for many things but that the seeds are not delivering what promise, if somebody wants to produce in the same traditional way is free to do it.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:39 PM Reply Like
  • sandydogg
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    That is silly nonsense, mr vwahby. Each silly comment by people who never broached biochemistry, toxicology, horticulture, agronomy, and hydrology indirectly causes malnutrition and death due to LACK of food.
    15 Feb 2013, 01:18 PM Reply Like
  • John1138
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    No one has to purchase Monsanto seeds unless they judge them superior for their own purposes. It's seems similar to a DRM software issue: you have been put on notice you're buying one copy and one only. Whether you then make the purchase is up to you.
    15 Feb 2013, 02:35 PM Reply Like
  • Tokamak
    , contributor
    Comments (112) | Send Message
     
    Actually, they're not free to produce in the traditional way. Who do you think controls prices and distribution? Who's going to buy your traditional product from traditional seed? How much do you think they'll pay for it?
    It's one thing to say someone is free to do something and quite another when the other aspects of the system will not support such a practicality. It's called talking out the side of your mouth.
    15 Feb 2013, 10:19 PM Reply Like
  • David Kramer
    , contributor
    Comments (15) | Send Message
     
    As I recall didn't Monsanto sue corn farmers who's crops were adulterated by nearby GMO crops? Genetics does not respect fence lines. As I see it farmers who's crops that are supposed to be non-GMO that are tainted with Monsanto's GMO DNA blowing over into their fields should have more of a case than Monsanto. If Monsanto wants to protect it's patents it should develop crops that are infertile on subsequent plantings.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:50 PM Reply Like
  • Advill
    , contributor
    Comments (2194) | Send Message
     
    That´s why patent law has to be rewrite and take into consideration what Science and Tech is bringing to us.

     

    Rgds
    15 Feb 2013, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • Wildandlooney
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    I like how people that dont even farm comment about MON. I use their seed, I buy new seed every year. Corn is at 7 dollars who cares if I pay 150 dollars for a bag of corn. I don't have to buy MON there are plenty of other companies to chose from, I just like their sales rep.
    15 Feb 2013, 04:05 PM Reply Like
  • Topcat
    , contributor
    Comments (416) | Send Message
     
    I highly recommend watching the movie "Food, Inc." and then do further research, especially about Monsanto.
    16 Feb 2013, 11:40 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|