Wonderful Monds (07-07-2013)
A local guy here started Kenekted...a facebook without ads or silly games or a lot of the stuff people complain about. I joined and was promptly bored by the lack of any activity. It ain't easy coding something intuitive and easy to use that also grabs peoples imagination.
I can't buy a hybrid Rose that some company developed, grow it out, and start propagating it for sale.. That's protected too.
Companies need protection like this, otherwise there's no incentive to develop new plants. It's no different than giving the drug companies protection for the drugs they sell.
Thank you Walt and Bob for bringing winning baseball back to Cincy
Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!
1) Monsanto owns a patent on the seed. Copyright is something entirely different. The patent right gives them what is essentially a monopoly for a 20 year period. Because of that patent right, the farmer does not have the right to make copies of the seed (odd in this case because the seed is essentially self-replicating when cultivated).
2) The farmer entered into a licensing agreement with Monsanto whereby he agreed to limit his use to one growing season, and also agreed not to save seed for subsequent seasons.
3) The farmer has every right not to use the Monsanto seed; however, given that it is resistant to Roundup and other pesticides, his labor would increase significantly and his yield would likely decrease significantly. Nonetheless, he could have opted not to use Monsanto seed.
4) Monsanto spent hundreds of millions of dollars inventing the pesticide resistant seed.
I have little doubt that Monsanto gouges the hell out of farmers for its seed, but that has little bearing on patent protection. I think the SCOTUS got this one right.
How do we know he's not Mel Torme?