Monsanto Patent Revoked In Europe!!!!!!!!!

[Jcrowley]

This is a very big victory.
No patents on life!!!

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Date: May 3, 2007 3:35 PM
Subject: CONGRATS TO ETC, GREENPEACE, and Others - Monsanto Patent revoked in Europe!!!!!!!!!
To: [e-mail]


European Patent Office revokes Monsanto´s species patent on genetically
engineered soy beans

Munich, May 3, 2007. In a public hearing at the board of appeal at the
European Patent Office a basic patent (EP 0301749) of US company
Monsanto was revoked today. Reasons were that parts of the patent were
not really new and others details were not described in a way that the
invention could be really repeated by other experts.

The final decision was the outcome of appeals which were filed by
Canadian civil society organisation ETC Group and the European Company
of Syngenta. Further oppositions were filed orginally by the NGO "No
Patents on Life!" and four other companies when the patent was granted
in 1994. Even Monsanto filed an opposition, but then bought the company
Agracetus which originally owned the patent, withdrew its opposition
and started to defend the patent.

According to Hope Shand of ETC Group, „The decision comes pretty late,
13 years after the patent was granted. But the decision to revoke the
patent is wonderful news. The species wide soybean patent of Monsanto
is not allowed to stand."

In its orginal version as granted the patent covered all genetically
engineered plant species and especially soybeans and was seen as one of
the broadest species patent ever granted on plants and seeds. The
background of the so called invention was a >particle gun< method by
which plants get bombarded by metallic particles and so introducing
foreign genes into plant material. A similar version of the particle
gun (which does not allow a precise transfer of gene sequences) is
still being used today to produce not only in Monsanto´s plants.

Ruth Tippe from the organisation „No Patents on Life!" says: "This is
an important step against patents on seeds, because it shows that civil
society will keep on fighting and can finally succeed even against
powerful multinationals."

The outcome of the procedure will not only affect Monsanto but also the
European Patent Office: "It is now shown that the Patent Office is
granting patents which are covering broad sectors of agricultural
diversity without really invention behind. There are many others
patents which simply satisfy the greed of companies but do not give
benefits to society," says Christoph Then from Greenpeace.

[Kagemusha]

1. Talk about cognitive dissonance.

The reasons for the patent being withdrawn are all narrow and technical and the reasons for applying for the patent to be withdrawn in the first place are all broad and crusade-like... and the people who applied for the patent to be withdrawn consider it the first step of a massive campaign which is not whatsoever supported by the single case only, narrow technical details cited for the patent being withdrawn.

My head's spinning.

[Buzz Clik]

34. indeed. I raised an eyebrow after comparing the decision to the spin.

[Morgana LaFey]

49. Hah! I'm still stuck on "species wide soybean patent"

SPECIES WIDE?????? Good grief.

[truedelphi]

50. That's how legalities work

You cannot always get at your opponent through successful argument of
what would morally or ethically apply - but some loop hole in the law will allow you to achieve the means through a technicality

happens all the time in court.

[Cha]

2. This sounds good..anything

against monsanto's spread across our Planet is a Victory!~

[snappyturtle]

3. This is huge, Wonder how long it will take Americans to catch on?nt

[rurallib]

5. It won't (n/t)

[ClintonTyree]

23. Considering that the Bush administration is chocked full...

of former Monsanto management employees, I'd say the chances are slim and none. :eyes:

[snappyturtle]

46. Monsanto is all about profit.....first husband was in

management for 12 years at Monsanto until the time Monsanto started producing aspartame. They're out for themselves and I too doubt that Americans will catch on. I have to stop. So much is going through my mind about Monsanto and their heinous acts is too much.

edit: I'm not naive...I know all corporations seek profit, but in Monsanto's case, at what cost to the environment and thus individuals, do we say,"Enough"!

[poverlay]

4. Yippee! I hate that horrible company. Anything that handicaps them is music to my ears! n/t

[Deb]

6. kick

[gollygee]

7. K&R

great news!

[Kurovski]

8. K&R. nt)

[bonito]

9. K&R n/t

[AX10]

10. K & R!

[Zodiak]

11. While I am not against genetically modified crops intellectually

I am against the fact that they are being patented and used in a proprietary fashion and I do not think that the potential environmental impact on these cultivars on natural populations of related plants has been suficiently studied or controlled (unlike animals, plant genes do potentially transfer from species to species). Lastly, I do not approve of the overuse of round-up ready crops because they promote the overuse of herbicides.

This is a victory. Monsanto has proven themselves to be engaged in predatory capitalism, which is anathema to progress for the average person. The fact that it is the food supply affected indicates that this battle is absolutely imperative to win....and soon.

Interesting that it was the gene gun patent that was lost.....gene guns have been in use in laboratories for many years to transfer genetic material to plant calyxs when the gene has proven difficult to deliver by virus. I had no idea Monsanto had a patent on it.

[DemBones DemBones]

17. "Predatory capitalism" describes Monsanto perfectly.

Our food supply is clearly in danger for many reasons. This decision gives a little hope.

[derby378]

12. K&R - couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of soulless freaks

:bounce:

[NotGivingUp]

13. ha! screw you, monsanto...you fascist pigs!!!

[Canuckistanian]

14. Life... is not for sale

Sorry, Monsanto.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nam78_two]

16. K&R

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[IChing]

18. kick

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

19. K & R

[soothsayer]

20. death to monsatan!

[JVS]

21. I fail to see the good in this. So now everyone can make fucked up GM stuff, GREAT!

[jberryhill]

24. You nailed it. If people DON'T want GM, then this story is a setback

Cracks me up... The EPO deems the patent non-inventive and not adequately disclosed, and the anti-GM folks think this is a victory?

Now ANYBODY can use the technique described in the patent.

[1932]

38. People don't make this stuff in their kitchen. It takes milions of dollars in research

and, by taking away the monopoly right for its manufacture, you remove a big part of the financial incentive to create it.

[LiberalEsto]

51. Good.

Then maybe they'll stop manufacturing some of this stuff.

[Vidar]

22. Bravo Europe!

[jberryhill]

25. So you are in favor of GM crops, yes?

Because the "victory" here is that Monsanto cannot prevent others from using this technique in Europe.

If you wanted to stop GM plants, then what you'd do is either get your own patents or buy the existing ones.

Invalidating Monsanto's patent merely means that anyone else is allowed to do it royalty-free.

Just so I understand this correctly - Greenpeace is attempting to open up the market in genetic plant modification techniques to more companies by discouraging the patenting of these techniques?

[Buzz Clik]

36. That was my chuckle as well. This really does nothing about GM crops.

[RaleighNCDUer]

39. It was not the patent on the GM technique that was in question -

it was patenting the plant itself - Monsanto was trying to get the soybean as their own, proprietary product, as I understand it. They mapped the genome of the soybean, the applied for a patent on it. that would mean that anybody who produced soybeans other than themselves would HAVE to GM it, to differentiate their product from Monsanto's.

As I understand it.

[jberryhill]

48. Trust me on this

I'm a patent attorney.

Anything you were doing in Europe prior to someone else filing a patent, you can keep right on doing.

No - even prior to this ruling, Monsanto was not being granted an exclusive right to grow soybeans.

What you *can* do in the US, for example, is to come up with a modified version of some plant and patent (a) the technique for modifying it, and (b) the plant that results from that technique.

Luther Burbank, for whom the town of Burbank, CA is named, patented eight different varieties of peaches, and nobody sheds a tear over that.

[LiberalEsto]

53. Luther Burbank's peaches

don't make all the other peach varieties growing around them sterile.

[jberryhill]

57. You are correct

But that observation is not relevant to either the wisdom of granting patents on plant varieties, nor to the reasons why this particular patent was invalidated.

I would be interested to see a documented report of the effect to which you refer, though. I believe it is outstandingly stupid to engineer plants with this property, but I am by no means educated enough in the relevant field to know whether these reports are hype or not.

[LiberalEsto]

58. I wasn't talking about patents

but about Monsanto being evil. They are, among other things, partly responsible for what are called "Terminator seeds".

Here is a web site about "Terminator seeds" for further reading:

http://www.banterminator.org/the_issues/introduction/terminator_technology_suicide_seeds_are_back

[pnorman]

26. I came on this thread early, and began to Google for an authoritive source.

I found NOTHING --- no quoted excerpts, no keywords --- NOTHING. I just got back here and learned that the poster, apparently held in high regard by some here, had been TOMBSTONED! Can someone here explain WTF happened?

Unmistakable Freeper/disruptor types need to be handed surely and swiftly. But where there's grounds for discussion? ---WHERE is the discussion? IMO: Unless there's some more 'transparency' in this Tombstoning process, it could do much damage to this DU community in days to come.

pnorman

[WiseButAngrySara]

30. See post #30 and 41 above. Maybe some explanation? I can

find no current reason.

[file83]

44. That's a trip!! "Jcrowley" has been shown off the premises...

I Googled Jcrowley here and I've never seen so many "Thank you's" and "Great Post!" replies for an author (except for Kpete & WillPitt).

Maybe it's a mistake? It just doesn't make any sense, unless Jcrowley posted about something in another thread that really violated the rules... without any explanation, I guess we'll have to just wait and see.

Know anyone that knew Jcrowley? Did Jcrowley have a blog?

[file83]

45. More research on Jcrowley....

I found this: Jcrowley (326 posts) Wed Sep-20-06 02:18 PM

This just establishes that Jcrowley has only been posting since maybe middle of 2006. So, not a long term member.

I also found this:

April 10, 2007

To their credit, the mods at DU finally locked the thread (embarrassing!), but in the mean-time, poster Jcrowley had plenty of support, including 44 "recommendations."

(source: Controversial Thread)

That was less than a month ago. I'll go prowl through some other discussion sections and see if I can find some recently locked threads by Jcrowley that might explain why the tombstoning occured...

[truedelphi]

55. i too am upset about tombstoning - If someone is not

Being outrageously RUDe and flaming - ic an't udnerstand what is happening with increasing frequency.

I have sometimes taken the time to PM the person left with a remark or two following the tombstoned one - and they will tell me that even being "progressive" can get you tombstoned these days

[Eurobabe]

27. Hallejah-fuckin-lujah!

Now where do I send my donation to Greenpeace Europe?

[The Count]

28. Boston Legal just had a case - patent on someone's DNA

That is a colossal milestone in the corporate takeover of society.
These immortal "persons" who claim the same rights as us, but have none of the obligations will own us all some day if we're not careful.

[texpatriot2004]

29. Yeah for Europe nm

[WiseButAngrySara]

31. Kick for the tombstoning of Jcrowley. What the reason? ....n/t

[GliderGuider]

32. the struggle continues

Ban Terminator campaign

Click here: http://www.banterminator.org/the_campaign
then click the Take Action tab.

"Governments agreed at the UN meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity in March 2006 to uphold and strengthen the international moratorium on Terminator. We now need an international ban as well as national bans in order to stop Terminator seeds from ever being field tested and commercialized. Please take steps to work for an international ban and national bans on Terminator.

Join the campaign for a national ban in your country."

[WiseButAngrySara]

33. Thanks for the link! Any idea what happened to Jcrowley, the OP?

He/she has been tombstoned.

[WiseButAngrySara]

35. Kick. ....n/t

[Buzz Clik]

37. Is it Monsanto specifically that most of you hate, or the concept of a big seed company?

Many of you are strongly opposed to GM crops, so Monsanto would be caught in that net. However, it seems that the dislike for Monsanto on this thread far exceeds that. If the snarling against Monsanto is simply because it markets seeds, you probably haven't thought this through very carefully.

[LiberalEsto]

41. Monsanto is evil

They have engineered various grain seeds that are sterile, so farmers can't save seeds and use them for the following year's crop. They have to pay Monsanto every year for new seeds.

The really evil part is that these particular plants send their pollen to neighboring fields and render those crops sterile too. The old non-sterile strains of plants are eradicated, and every farmer is forced to buy from Monsanto whether they want to or not. The engineered seeds cost money, and it's much cheaper to use seed from the previous year's harvest, so this hurts poor farmers particularly hard.

It's also a problem because when there is only one variety of plant available, it becomes much more vulnerable to being wiped out by disease, as happened with the Irish Potato famine in the early 1800s. There was only one type of potato being grown and it had no resistance to the disease that killed all the plants. The Irish had also drastically reduced grain production in favor of potato growing, so there was not enough grain to feed the starving population.

Making every farmer in a given country dependent on expensive engineered seed from a single source, with no genetic variations as insurance against disease, is a recipe for potential famine.

Also, as a former resident of NJ, I "thank" Monsanto for dumping large amounts of toxic waste around the state several decades ago (along with other companies, of course.)

[Buzz Clik]

43. Okay, that was totally uninformed.

First, Monsanto is not the only distributor of seeds in any given location. Saying only that demonstrates that you know nothing about this subject.

Secondly, dozens of varieties of every crop are available, and Monsanto itself has multiple varieties.

(Where does this crap come from?)

[LiberalEsto]

52. I never said they were the only ones

I'm saying that the practice is evil. Monsanto is the only company that I specifically know does this. I'm sure there are other evil companies.

Secondly, Monsanto shouldn't try to wipe out other varieties of plants with its GM plants. That is dead wrong.

Hope you had a nice day at the Monsanto public relations department.



:)

[RaleighNCDUer]

56. While I have nothing to back it up, I'm also not at all convinced that

GM crops have nothing to do with the accelerating bee colony collapses around the world. Are bee colonies dying off in places where there are no GM crops? I'd be interested in seeing a map overlay of bee die off and regions with GM crops. There is SOMETHING wrong with the honey they bees collect before they disappear, because insect scavangers which normally loot abandonded hives for their honey avoid these hives.

Pure speculation, but enquiring minds want to know.

[truedelphi]

54. It is Monsanto & other corporations into GMO that hate the marketing of seeds

What is it that you don't udnerstand about this issue.

Monsanto and the other GMO corporations are patenting the seeds of foodstuffs.

For example, a researcher was sent to investigate the various crops of maize that the Native Indian cultures had subsided on for millenia.

The seed from one of those maize species was taken back to the designer lab - the DNA of that corn's genome was mapped out and then patented - and then POOF! it was now illegal for those indigenous people to eat the corn whose ancestors had offered the example to the laboratory so that it could be patented.

Also Monsanto has its RoundUp ready crops - and the seed from those crops pollutes the neighboring crops. if you thought about this logically, you would say, "Well when that occurs, then the huge monopoly corporation Monsanto should be made to pay for destroying a farmer's ability to grow non-pesticided crops. And to not have his or her fields contaminated with this Frankenseed crop."

But instead, Monsanto will sue the farmer who has the crops growing there. In some cases, Monsanto ends up owning the land where the seed fromt heir RoundUp ready crops are growing.

[MasonJar]

40. Monsanto is one of the most environmentally unsound corporate

fiends out there.

[file83]

42. Woah..."particle gun method by which plants get bombarded by metallic particles..."

"...and so introducing foreign genes into plant material"

Umm..WTF!! I can't believe they allow this weird Dr. Crazy Sci-Fi shit into our food supply.

[Monk06]

47. Read the story again everyone. Second sentence in the second paragraph.

Reasons were that parts of the patent were
not really new and others details were not described in a way that the
invention could be really repeated by other experts.

Patent law in general requires the all research and manufacturing
information which would establish uniqueness must be included in
the patent application.

The Monsanto genetic research appears to be mundane and non unique.

The clincher is the failure to disclose experimental results that can
be repeated. This begs an important question.

Is the Monsanto 'research' fraudulent?

Are the Monsanto soy beans in fact genetically modified at all?

If the answer to the second question is no then Monsanto use using
patent law in an attempt at monopoly control of the world's food
supply. It strongly implies the GE modification of seed species
is a monumental fraud.

I have to sign off now. I have to work on my new automobile patent.
It has an engine, transmission but five wheels instead of four.

I'M GOING TO BE RICH !!!! RICH BEYOND MEASURE I TELL YA !!!!!!