Indiana Farmer Loses Battle Against Monsanto - East Idaho News
News

Indiana Farmer Loses Battle Against Monsanto

  Published at

Getty 051313 SoyBeans?  SQUARESPACE CACHEVERSION=1368468533315iStockphoto/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court ruled on Monday against a 76-year-old Indiana farmer who had taken on Monsanto in a patent dispute over a genetically modified soybean seed.

“The question in this case,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote for a unanimous court, “is whether a farmer who buys patented seeds may reproduce them through planting and harvesting without the patent holder’s permission.  We hold that he may not.”

Monsanto developed the seed that is resistant to a powerful weed killer called Roundup.

Farmers pay a premium price for the seeds and enter into the contract with the company promising to buy new seeds for subsequent planting seasons.  Monsanto makes the requirement in order to protect the company’s investment and its patented technology.  The seed is now used for more than 90 percent of soybeans grown in the United States.

Bowman has purchased the seed for years for his first crop and abided by the technology agreement.  But for a more risky, second-crop planting later in the season, Bowman didn’t want to invest in the expensive soy bean.

Second plantings are susceptible to the dangers of a short growing time and the threat of drought.  He decided to take a risk and buy a mix of unlabeled seed from the local grain elevator hoping that most of it would be Roundup resistant.  After harvesting that crop, he would save the progeny and replant it.

Monsanto sued Bowman in 2007.

“In the case at hand, Bowman planted Monsanto’s patented soybeans solely to make and market replicas of them, thus depriving the company of the reward patent law provides for the sale of each article,” Kagan wrote.

She said that under the doctrine of patent exhaustion, the authorized sale of a patented article gives the purchaser, or any subsequent owner, a right to use or resell that article.  But she cautioned, “Such a sale, however, does not allow the purchaser to make new copies of the patented invention.”

Kagan said that Monday’s holding is “limited” and addresses only Bowman’s situation “rather than every one involving a self replicating product.”

She said she recognized that “in another case” at a time when inventions are becoming more prevalent, “the article’s self-replication might occur outside the purchaser’s control.”

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

SUBMIT A CORRECTION