Jon & Karl:
Okay. You've helped remove (knocked off) my rose colored glasses, reminding
me of both the time limitation of patents & the all too obvious power of
capital in the world today. So, maybe a "scratch" in Monsanto's armor? They
did recently suffer (maybe this is a tad overblown too) a court defeat on
their alfalfa environmental assessment.
There must be something I (we) can grab onto as a gain in our struggles for
fairness & justice, even if there's no precedent set by the ruling. There's
got to be some karmic value (apologies to materialists in the crowd) even as
Monsanto & its mercenaries strut n' laugh all the way to the bank. Pyrrhic
victory? Ouch.
Jon, thanks for your thorough response to my post. Sobering and appreciated.
Like a bucket of cold water over the head to snap me out of my illusion. I
needed that.
best
Tony

On 5/4/07, Jon Bosak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Tony Del Plato wrote:
> > Are we reading/speaking the same language: patent revoked. While the
> legal &
> > technical issues are wrestled with, regardless of how long it took, the
> > strange irony is that Monsanto's earlier arguments, prior to its
> > appropriation of the seeds, were used against it in the recent decision.
> The
> > patent on one of the most common foods is no longer valid.
>
> The patent would have expired in another year *anyway.*
>
> > I think it's
> > important that we "see" a crack in the Monsanto armor.
>
> Not if there isn't one.
>
> > It will take much
> > more to "decomidify" patents on foods and living things, but most
> struggles
> > are won by a series of small steps.
>
> This was not one of those steps.  The effect of the ruling on the
> remainder of
> Monsanto's patent portfolio is nothing. Nada. Zero.
>
> > Several years ago, WR Grace lost it's
> > patent on products from the neem tree, again in Europe, years after it
> > attempted to appropriate the source of ingredients used for thousands of
> > years by peoples of India to make medicines & cosmetics. Percy Schmeiser
> > lost his case in Canada based upon the fact that he "knowingly" planted
> > round up rape seed. The Canadian high courts ducked the issue of
> resolving
> > "ownership" of the genetic materials. I think it's important that every
> > chink in corporate control and the corporate state is acknowledged and
> > celebrated.
>
> Sure, but this was not such an occasion.  Look at the scoreboard again:
>
> Monsanto: 13 out of 14 possible years of gains from the soy patent.
>
> ETC Group: 13 years of legal fees down the drain without establishing
> any useful precedent.
>
> > I'm getting a sense that we're having a hair splitting
> > discussion here.
>
> Well, I don't have the time (or apparently the ability) to explain
> the concept of a Pyrrhic victory, so I'll stop.  But I can tell you
> that Monsanto cried all the way to the bank.
>
> Jon
>
> _______________________________________________
> RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for:
> [email protected]
> http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins
> free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
>



-- 
To give pleasure to a single heart by a single act is better than a thousand
heads bowing in prayer.
-- Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)

America believes in education: the average professor earns more money in a
year than a professional athlete earns in a whole week.
  - Evan Esar
_______________________________________________
RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for:
[email protected]
http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins
free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org

Reply via email to