| He wasn't trying to get access to the patented genes for free. He was specifically given access to the patented genes for free. He didn't sneak around and steal it. It was forced on him. His choices were: * don't plant * plant, but don't harvest seed * plant, harvest seed, test and remove any contaminant * plant, harvest seed, take your chances * plant, select for resistance using legally purchased chemicals * plant, sue Monsanto for contamination Imagine if some rogue scientist exposed me to some chemical that made all my offspring develop a patented ocular structure that produced better than 20/20 vision, and caused all their offspring to develop the same. Imagine that said scientist did so without my consent or knowledge. Should the scientist win a lawsuit against me when my grandchildren exhibit the patented trait? Should my children be barred from reproducing? Or does the scientist lose patent protection when they contaminate others? If I encourage my children to seek mates from a pool of others who were contaminated does that behavior matter? Also, FWIW, an experiment to see if I have Roundup-resistant grass is not a patent-violating experiment. Anybody who so desires can run a protocol where they spray generations of crops with decreasingly diluted Roundup to select for resistance. This violates no patents. And I have in the past sacrificed portions of my lawn to eradicate a particularly noxious thistle. You may call this stupid, but my grass grew back very quickly and the thistle never returned. |