Seed pwned by Monsanto

[zazen999]

Hey - who changed my title! It's pwned - not owned.

*runs off to change it back.

[Helgalush]

Yes - I'm gutted. I love these carrots.

Strangely enough - the seeds I saved from them 2 years ago never germinated. Not one of them. Hmm.....

Me too - they are so flavourful & tasty. I'm really disappointed to learn this. I got some free from a BBC thingy a few years ago and they did really well in pots at home last year - much more tasty than the little Parmex carrots. Perhaps I will just have to experiment with some others.... big big shame though.

ETA: Do you think its likely to be any carrot with Chantenay in the title? ie Royal Chantenay are listed on the link in the opening post, but elsewhere you see them as Chantenay Red. Are they one and the same? (Assume so but, you know, clutching at straws....)

[donnakebab]

I had a free packet of California Wonder sweet pepper seeds from the February issue. So are these the same as California Wonder 300 on the Seminis product list or is there a subtle difference?

[veggiechicken]

Are Chantenay Red cored seeds OK or is it any carrot with Chantenay in its name?

[Potstubsdustbins]

Now I might be wrong (Wouldn't be the first time) but as I read that list I came to the following conclusion.

(a) Monsanto hold the trade mark to the name only. Trade mark is a big subject but as I understand it they have bought/registered the trade mark to try and stop other companies profiting from that name or a similar name. Therefore if they have trade marked Royal Chantenay then the guys who are producing Chantenay Red might just be taking money out of Mosanto's pocket. How nice would that be.

(b) The article states quite clearly that at this time Monsanto will only profit if the seed is purchased through them or one of their suppliers. If you purchase from anyone else like an independant organic company again Monsanto loses out.

Fortunately for me none of my seed is named there.

Colin

[zazen999]

With regards the name - I'd imagine that if suppliers were found to be supplying Monsanto seed with an alternative name - they would probably be sued. So my guess is that it's Royal Chantenay only that's an issue. My main concern here would be - that's the USA name. As the UK site is not showing us the UK names, we have no idea what name they are marketing it under in the UK.

However in response to Tubby's question - we don't know if any suppliers in Europe have been licenced to sell any Monsanto seed under their own 'brand names'...we know the seed suppliers sell their own 'varieties' but we don't know where they come from and the provenance - so the jury is out on that one!
[A bit like Baked Beans being supplied to Heinz as well as supermarkets under their own branding].

It's a veritable field of despair as to which seed to support and which to drop.

[Newton]

Thanks zaz. I will avoid the Monsanto seeds like the plague. But you make a couple of biased and unfactual points in your thread which take away from your on message........

1 all seed companies are capitalists. They are there to make a profit.......that in itself is fact. Your comment was unnecessary to get the point across

2. The veggies you grow from the seed you have bought is yours to eat compost and if you are able to save some seed then you can eat the veg that grows from that. They do not own them.

However your message was both welcome and important to me. I will now not buy and use any of their seeds. Thanks.

[Aberdeenplotter]

Zaz has just taken yet another opportunity to have a pop at Monsanto, it isn't the first and I'm sure it won't be the last. I have no issues with that, she wants to get a message over. As I put it in another thread about something completely different, she is continuing to bang the drum about it to get out attention.

To put a bit of perspective on this though, protecting the rights to crop varieties isn't unique to Monsanto. I'm sure there was an issue with seed potatoes a few years back where the rights to the Irish Variety Rooster are held by a company that took issue with another company selling supplies of Rooster to a grower. Marks and Spencer owns the rights to the carrot variety Sweet Candle. These companies either incur expenditure in developing the the varieties or buy the rights from the developer.

It is only right that they should be able to benefit from their research and development. If one of us spent a fortune in research and development on the production of a mildew resistant pea and Joe Bloggs bought, grew and took seed from the plants and then sold them thereby taking away our market and ability to recover our R&D costs, we would not be happy.


As I said though, Zaz is having another pop at Monsanto and some of the comments already made by some of the contributors could well be libelous. I would be for closing the thread on that basis if I were a Mod.

[Kaiya]

I think that's an over reaction - libel would be accusing them of things they haven't done, not expressing opinion on things they have.

Having patent on a product is not the issue. How a company behaves is that issue. Taking action against someone who is breeding and selling potatoes under your trademark is valid - you have to protect your trademark and you can't trust the quality will be representative. However, preventing people from saving seed to use on their own land is not the same thing.

[MojoJojo]

This seems to be a bit of an overreaction.

It's only the trademarked name they have rights too, these aren't crops they have a patent on. I believe they could only patent GM crops, and that just isn't going to be worthwhile for non-commercial crops.
As far as I am aware, there is nothing to stop a seed seller growing seed from one of the listed varieties and selling it, as long as they didn't use the trademarked name. It's only the name they have rights too.
Also, these are US trademarks. You can search for UK trademarks here Intellectual Property Office - Trade marks - find by mark text or image. Chantenay isn't listed. If it's an old variety that is well known, they won't be able to trademark the name in the UK, in the same way I can't trademark "Lemonade" or "Cola". I can only assume the varieties were unknown in the US before the trademarks were registered.

...actually looking at the original list it's not even clear they have trademarks on any of those names. I think they're just the varieties Monsanto produces, and they're advocating not buying any of them just in case they were produced by Monsanto. Sort of like avoiding all chocolate in case it was made by Nestle.

[zazen999]

Zaz has just taken yet another opportunity to have a pop at Monsanto, it isn't the first and I'm sure it won't be the last. I have no issues with that, she wants to get a message over. As I put it in another thread about something completely different, she is continuing to bang the drum about it to get out attention.

You are just as free to start a thread telling everyone how great you think they are.

You are stating the obvious - yes, it's a thread about Monsanto. The clue is in the title. What of it?

[Aberdeenplotter]

Did I say they were great? I must have missed that. I have said I have no issue with you banging a drum. Bang away. There just needs to be a modicum of perspective

[zazen999]

1 all seed companies are capitalists. They are there to make a profit.......that in itself is fact. Your comment was unnecessary to get the point across

2. The veggies you grow from the seed you have bought is yours to eat compost and if you are able to save some seed then you can eat the veg that grows from that. They do not own them.

However your message was both welcome and important to me. I will now not buy and use any of their seeds. Thanks.

a - which comment was unnecessary? If it's the thing about capitalism at it's worst/best - then perhaps the Terminator Gene debate might be of interest.

b - nobody said that the veg wouldn't be ours to eat and compost. However if GM pollen lands and pollinates other seed, Monsanto have tried to 'own' that seed from thereon in - for example suing farmers whose seed got contaminated by the GM pollen by claiming that the seed was now patented to Monsanto and the farmers were infringing the patent. For their own seed, grown on their own land. Nice eh?


Further - this has even wider ranging potential effects - such as the issue of selling honey contaminated by GM pollen

[zazen999]

Did I say they were great? I must have missed that. I have said I have no issue with you banging a drum. Bang away. There just needs to be a modicum of perspective

Perspective? It's not about rights to varieties - nor it is about benefiting from research and development.

If you don't understand that then perhaps you might want to read some of the articles.

[bearded bloke]

Oh dear,what a sad state of affairs this is ............













a computer game programmer mis-spelt a word & now it is being used in forum thread titles as if it were a real word,which is actually worse than using Americanism's or the ever popular bored beans