Consider the case where the gene edited crops actually implemented a dependency on roundup, and the neighboring farms were forced to use round up rather than did so because it was simply more useful.
The claim that Monsanto sues people for accidentally or unwillingly having their patented seeds sown is simply false, full stop.
It's perfectly reasonable to oppose all patents. Just don't pretend the wind, sun, and dirt somehow invalidate seed patents. There's no distinction to draw.
U take tuber u put it in ground it grows more tubers u try to sell BOOM illegal son .
0
Am surprised even need to explain on this forum of coders. Many examples of bad boy software patents.
Here is the patent for the FC5 potato.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US6940004B2/en
Read it carefully because while the patent claims that it also would apply if transgenic modifications are added, the variety was developed through just classic breeding techniques, which are described in the patent in case you aren’t familiar.
If everyone who bred a potato patented it, we all suffer as breeders would be limited in what they can work with.
It seems perfectly reasonable to most people that even if you own a patent on a seed that if I obtain it and can grow it I should be able to, in the way that your rights are generally exhausted if you sell a patented part to retail.
Monsanto would lose nothing in case where it was accidental and where the farmer intended it Monsanto would benefit from selling roundup.
Because of this, no plausible damages to Monsanto and that doing nothing is a perfect solution, the lawsuits seem egregious.