SCOTUS to rule on genetic engineering: 75-year-old farmer takes on Monsanto, Justice Dept., Universities, Apple/Microsoft and big farmer groups over soybeans

French rats fed Monsanto's genetically engineered 'Roundup-
Ready' NK603 — a seed variety made tolerant to Monsanto's
Roundup weedkiller — died early: 50% of male and 70% of
female rats died prematurely, compared with only 30% and
20% in the control group, said the researchers.
Monsanto Director of Corporate Communications Phil Angel:
''Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech
food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible.
Assuring its safety is the FDA's job.'' — New York Times

The New York Times says the issue in the case of Robert Hugh Bowman, an Indiana farmer, is whether patents on things that can self-replicate, like seeds, apply beyond the first generation of the products. This year the court will also rule on whether human genes can be patented, in a case involving a breast cancer risk test.
     Monsanto sells genetically-engineered soybeans containing the "Roundup Ready" gene, immune to the company's herbicidal poison, Roundup. This allows farmers to apply herbicides more liberally without damaging the crop. More than 90% of soybeans in the US use this technology.
     The Center for Food Safety, whose press release on the matter is here, notes the following:

• Today, three corporations control 53 percent of the global commercial seed market.
• Seed consolidation has led to market control resulting in dramatic increases in the price of seeds. From 1995-2011, the average cost to plant one acre of soybeans has risen 325 percent; for cotton prices spiked 516 percent and corn seed prices are up by 259 percent.

     The report also disputes seed industry claims that present seed patent rules are necessary for seed innovation.  As Bill Freese, senior scientist at Center for Food Safety and one of the report’s contributors notes:  “Most major new crop varieties developed throughout the 20th century owe their origin to publicly funded agricultural research and breeding.”
     Additionally, Seed Giants vs. U.S. Farmers reports a precipitous drop in seed diversity that has been cultivated for millennia. As the report notes:  86% of corn, 88% of cotton, and 93% of soybeans farmed in the U.S. are now genetically-engineered (GE) varieties, making the option of farming non-GE crops increasingly difficult.
     While agrichemical corporations also claim that their patented seeds are leading to environmental improvements, the report notes that upward of 26 percent more chemicals per acre were used on GE crops than on non-GE crops, according to USDA data.

     Monsanto makes farmers who buy the Roundup Ready soybean seeds sign a contract stipulating that they not save any seeds, which compels them to buy new seed each year.
     75-year-old Indiana farmer Robert Hugh Bowman honored that agreement, but then planted a riskier, late season crop with commodity grain he bought from an elevator, most of which, of course, was also Roundup Ready.
     Monsanto sued him anyway and a district court in Indiana awarded more than $84,000. An appeals court upheld the decision because it said Bowman had created newly-infringing articles.
     Monsanto has sued 410 farmers and 56 small farm businesses over this issue and settled out of court many other times, according to the Center for Food Safety.
     The Supreme Court, which more narrowly interprets patent rights, took the case, which surprised lawyers representing the Biotechnology Industry Organization.
     Bowman's principal defense is patent exhaustion, meaning patent holders lose control over how a patented object is used once it is sold.
     In 2008 it ruled LG Electronics couldn't control how manufacturers used Intel chips with technology licensed from it once Intel sold those chips.

     Monsanto and its allies... [say] that selling to a grain elevator and buying back seed would be too simple an end-run around the patents. They say exhaustion applies only to the particular item sold and does not give the buyer the right to make unlimited copies of that item, which is what Mr. Bowman did by growing new soybean plants from the grain elevator beans.
     Mr. Bowman’s side says that he was not making seeds, he was merely using the seed from the elevator, which is permissible. It just so happens that because of the nature of a seed, using one results in more copies being created. Mr. Bowman argues there should not be an exception to the exhaustion rule just because a patented item is self-replicating.

     Mr. Bowman and his allies argue that a ruling favoring them won't wreck biotech. Most farmers wouldn't buy large amounts of seed from grain elevators because it is of poor quality and Monsanto could still use contracts to stop farmers from saving seed it sells them.
     This is truly a David vs. Goliath case. Bowman and a few allies, mostly organic groups, face not only one of the world's most powerful, wealthy and litigious agribusinesses, but supporting briefs filed by the Justice Department, universities concerned about monetary incentives for research, laboratory instruments manufacturers and even farmer groups like the American Soybean Association, which claim seed patents encourage crop improvement.
     Even the Business Software Alliance, which represents both Microsoft and Apple interests, has filed a brief saying that deciding against Monsanto might “facilitate software piracy on a broad scale” because software can be easily copied. (Although it also said that a decision that goes too far in Monsanto's favor could make nuisance lawsuits alleging software patent infringement lawsuits too easy to file.)