>-enhanced crop safety; snip
> reduced content of toxic products such as mycotoxins, snip
I wonder what the people who published the mycotoxin discovery think about
their idea being part of somebodyelse's patent?
Also how much of the legal cost to determine what percentage of the reduced
mycotoxin benefit is attributable to the BT and what is due to the
pesticide synergy (and then there are those pesky changes in that
relationship as a function of soil type, weather conditions and other
factors like carrier insect populations) will be passed onto the end users
as higher food costs?
Or maybe as in another industry I was in, just the fact that a large
corporation has managed to get a patent from the new improved and defunded
Patent Office that includes a prior art idea will be enough to not only
keep them from using the prior art idea but will keep them from even
challangeing the illegal patent due to lack of resources to do legal battle
with a large corporation.
On the level of no moral constraints in the battle of corporations, this
patent is a Very Beautiful Strategy. Think of it,
I patent how people can use your products including the use of your
pesticide on your herbicide and pesticide resistant crops.
I now control how your customers can use your products through the license
they are required to buy from me due to my patent on the use of your products.
So the question becomes : "How much of your value stream to your customers
will I take in license fees? "
I love it. This system may very well collapse under the weight of its own
avarice. "Plutocracy today, plutocracy tomorrow, plutocracy forever" with
apologies to George Wallace. Mike Miller
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail