I could be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure the seeds used to grow commercial produce are patented. I could very easily be wrong though lol
Found some info:
“In 1980, the US supreme court ruled in the case Diamond v Chakrabarty that patent protection can be used for living organisms, including plants. Seeds, which have been openly saved and shared by growers for thousands of years, could now be claimed as an invention.”
Who cares? It’s deeply immoral to patent any living organism. You’re under no moral obligation to obey patently unjust and corrupt laws. And if you’re only “pirating” organisms on a small personal scale, your legal risk is nil. If you start an industrial operation selling patented foodcrops, then you’ll get in legal hot water. But just in your backyard garden? No one is suing you over that unless you create a whole YouTube video series publicly documenting and celebrating your actions.
Fuck evil companies that dare to patent living things. The very concept is an abomination against nature and common decency. It’s not only morally allowable, but a moral obligation to violate these laws whenever it is practical to do so.
I like where your head is at. I’m trying to think of a thought experiment…
A genie is willing to give me a one-million dollar loan and guaranteed instructions on how to genetically modify a seed to better feed 8 billion people - heck, even solve world hunger. That catch is I have to pay the genie back TWO million dollars.
I try to work with the government so the public takes on the (zero) risk and is on the hook for the money, but they don’t play ball.
Is it better for me to reject the deal than patent the seed? (I can ‘sell the patent to public domain’ once I break even!!)
PS: I suppose the genie should just be an investor because that is kind of how our beautiful, perfect, and fair capitalism plays it out
I know we both just want a better system so this experiment is about the status quo
I reject your hypothetical. Your hypothetical is built to ensure the conclusion you desire, not to accurately reflect the possible worlds that exist. Seeds could be developed by government labs and released into the public domain. Hell, the foundational science behind patented crops is all publicly funded already. The private companies just come along later and reap the benefit of the taxpayer’s investment.
Science doesn’t happen for a profit motive. Most scientists are people who are genuinely and passionately interested in their chosen field. They are intrinsically motivated to pursue knowledge for its own sake; they’re not in it to make a buck. The actual biologists and agronomists developing these crops don’t even get paid in a portion of the profits; they’re paid a salary. They would be just as, if not more happy, to be paid a salary as part of a state-funded research lab. The people actually developing these products would happily give them away to any and all, but parasites at the top turn it into a rent-seeking operation.
Oh, I agree with you. I was just piggy backing the statement I replied to, that questioned the legality of sterile seeds. I think the two go hand in hand, in that growers make produce with sterile seeds and/or patent the seeds to prevent any one else from using them.
Fuck the law if it doesn’t serve you (so long as you aren’t hurting anyone or anything but yours)
I could be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure the seeds used to grow commercial produce are patented. I could very easily be wrong though lol
Found some info:
“In 1980, the US supreme court ruled in the case Diamond v Chakrabarty that patent protection can be used for living organisms, including plants. Seeds, which have been openly saved and shared by growers for thousands of years, could now be claimed as an invention.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/jan/25/plant-patents-large-companies-intellectual-property-small-breeders#%3A~%3Atext=In+1980%2C+the+US+supreme%2Cbe+claimed+as+an+invention.
Who cares? It’s deeply immoral to patent any living organism. You’re under no moral obligation to obey patently unjust and corrupt laws. And if you’re only “pirating” organisms on a small personal scale, your legal risk is nil. If you start an industrial operation selling patented foodcrops, then you’ll get in legal hot water. But just in your backyard garden? No one is suing you over that unless you create a whole YouTube video series publicly documenting and celebrating your actions.
Fuck evil companies that dare to patent living things. The very concept is an abomination against nature and common decency. It’s not only morally allowable, but a moral obligation to violate these laws whenever it is practical to do so.
I like where your head is at. I’m trying to think of a thought experiment…
A genie is willing to give me a one-million dollar loan and guaranteed instructions on how to genetically modify a seed to better feed 8 billion people - heck, even solve world hunger. That catch is I have to pay the genie back TWO million dollars.
I try to work with the government so the public takes on the (zero) risk and is on the hook for the money, but they don’t play ball.
Is it better for me to reject the deal than patent the seed? (I can ‘sell the patent to public domain’ once I break even!!)
PS: I suppose the genie should just be an investor because that is kind of how our beautiful, perfect, and fair capitalism plays it out
I know we both just want a better system so this experiment is about the status quo
I reject your hypothetical. Your hypothetical is built to ensure the conclusion you desire, not to accurately reflect the possible worlds that exist. Seeds could be developed by government labs and released into the public domain. Hell, the foundational science behind patented crops is all publicly funded already. The private companies just come along later and reap the benefit of the taxpayer’s investment.
Science doesn’t happen for a profit motive. Most scientists are people who are genuinely and passionately interested in their chosen field. They are intrinsically motivated to pursue knowledge for its own sake; they’re not in it to make a buck. The actual biologists and agronomists developing these crops don’t even get paid in a portion of the profits; they’re paid a salary. They would be just as, if not more happy, to be paid a salary as part of a state-funded research lab. The people actually developing these products would happily give them away to any and all, but parasites at the top turn it into a rent-seeking operation.
Oh, I agree with you. I was just piggy backing the statement I replied to, that questioned the legality of sterile seeds. I think the two go hand in hand, in that growers make produce with sterile seeds and/or patent the seeds to prevent any one else from using them.
Fuck the law if it doesn’t serve you (so long as you aren’t hurting anyone or anything but yours)
Oh you’re serious. Let me laugh even harder!
Ignoring whether or not patents on agricultural products is moral or not, and ignoring whether ignoring those patents is itself moral or not:
No company is gonna bother going after you unless you try and sell product.