Monsanto Granted Motion to Dismiss

On February 24, Judge Naomi Buchwald handed down her ruling on a motion to dismiss in the case of OSGATA et al v. Monsanto after hearing oral arguments on January 31, in Federal  District Court in Manhattan. Her ruling to dismiss the case brought against Monsanto on behalf  of organic farmers, seed growers and agricultural organizations representing farmers and citizens was met with great disappointment by the plaintiffs.

Monsanto’s history of aggressive investigations and lawsuits brought against farmers in America have been a source of concern for organic and non-GMO farmers since Monsanto’s first lawsuit brought against a farmer in the mid-90′s.

Since then, 144 farmers have faced lawsuits instigated by Monsanto for alleged violations of
their patented seed technology. Monsanto has brought charges against more than 700 additional farmers who have settled out-of-court.

Many of these farmers claim to not have had the intention to grow or save seeds that contain Monsanto’s patented genes. Seed drift and pollen drift from their crops often contaminate neighboring fields. If Monsanto’s seed technology is found on a farmer’s land without contract they can be found liable for patent infringement.

“Family farmers need the protection of the court,” says OSGATA President and Maine organic seed farmer Jim Gerritsen. “We reject as naïve and undefendable the judge’s assertion that  Monsanto’s vague public relations ‘commitment’ should be ‘a source of comfort’ to plaintiffs. The truth is we are under threat and we do not believe Monsanto. The truth is that American farmers and the American people do not believe Monsanto. Family farmers deserve our day in court and this flawed ruling will not deter us from continuing to seek justice.”

Read the full press release. Judge Buchwald’s ruling is available here.

54 comments on “Monsanto Granted Motion to Dismiss

    • Judge Buchwald is in error with this ruling. She neglects the fact that Monsanto has already sued not only farmers growing their crops from their own recycled seed, which Monsanto’s nearby seed crops contaminated with their wind-blown pollen, but Monsanto has also put out of business individuals who helped shuck and clean those farmers’ own seeds for planting. It is clear that Monsanto’s goal is to monopolize their gmo crop seeds by contaminating all others so farmers have no choice but to buy from Monsanto only. This kind of monopoly in business is strictly illegal, yet Monsanto has been allowed so far in the U.S. to proceed with legal action against poorly represented farmers who cannot afford the expensive lawyers Monsanto has arrayed against them. I am for the farmers, especially because the gmo seeds that Monsanto sells and is trying to force on everyone have not been thoroughly tested over the years to insure that no harmful effects on human health can occur. Monsanto’s motive in attacking farmers is to profit as much as possible, as soon as possible. This corporate behavior is outrageous!

  1. Can anyone please tell me, why Monsanto is still being allowed to “pollute” organic farmers fields with their Monsanto’s GM seeds, or pollen spread? Why aren’t Monsanto being taken to task for “Pollution” and changing the genetic make-up on farms that do not belong to them? Obviously the USA government are doing their best to make sure this never happens, otherwise this type of Judgement passed down today, would never have happened.

    I ask you all, specially the American Public, what would happen if suddenly those 270,000 farmers stopped growing the food you enjoy today? Who will be left, and who will have enough money left, to grow food for you, real “organic” non-gm food in the years to come?

    I clearly hear the Indian-Cree Prophecy ringing inside my head…. and unfortunately, I’m starting to see it appear in our time, in our world……

    • I was interested in your comment with regard to “Judge Sides With Monsanto” and would like to ask you more about the prophecy you are referring to, or a website where I can read about it. Thanks

      Terry

  2. Monsanto’s threat to our food supply is terrifying, as is the ruling in this case. Forcing farmers to pay Monsanto for contamination to their crops by Monsanto’s seed drift is like forcing any other victim to pay the perpetrator. I support our farmers and the right to protect and conserve natural seeds as they were given to us by our Creator.

        • Since the conclusions I draw from the OSGATA et. al. v. Monsanto rulnig are very different from other responses posted on this page I will first state that I DO support OSGATA’s policies, I AM very concerned about GMO & other aspects of conventional agriculture that appear to be both unsustainable and unhealthy, and finally I AM NOT a lawyer. I share these thoughts in hope that OSGATA et. al. will be successful in the pursuit of their objectives.I read Judge Buchwald’s rulnig. I also read the rulnig on Prasco LLC v Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation that is prominently featured in Buchwald’s rulnig. I viewed the video of Daniel Ravicher’s speech at the National Heirloom Expo and have done what I can to learn in a short time what declaratory judgement , subject matter jurisdiction , justiciability and Article III of the Constitution mean in the context of patent law in a federal court.My conclusion is that in pursuing a declaratory judgement relative to Monsanto’s patents in a Federal Court (basically suing Monsanto to prevent Monsanto from suing others for patent infringement) OSGATA et. al. may playing Monsanto’s game under rules that appear to be very favorable to Monsanto. While there may be much evidence of harm done by Monsanto to OSGATA et. al. or a least evidence of valid reasons to be concerned about future harm, the abstract and (to me) bizarre structure & function of a declaratory judgement action rendered that evidence moot in OSGATA et. al.’s case.At the risk of sounding even more naive than I have already, I ask why OSGATA et. al. did not pursue other legal action such as challenging the safety of GMO food, challenging the validity of patents on life forms, calling Monsanto to task for environmental damage caused by their products or challenging Monsanto’s business practices?Sincerely, SH

  3. As for Judge Buchwald,or any judge,if you do not rule according to the Constitution,then I ,personally,have the utmost in contempt for you!Why should anyone put up with criminal behavior at any level?The judge has been bought,pure and simple,and should be impeached.

  4. The judge didn’t ridicule farmers rights, but rather pointed out that Monsanto has never sued an organic farmer, and as such the fear was unsubstantiated. They can’t prove you have stolen their intelllectual property without proving intent to use it – and what organic farmer would intentionally use RoundUP genetics??? Therefore Monsanto hasn’t and won’t be able to sue organic farmers over genetically engineered intellectual property.

    I want GMO labels, buy organic, and believe farmers have the right to save seed – but I never understood why you all were promoting a case about patenting as a case about protecting organic farmers. That was misleading. I think that the plaintiffs made a mistake in talking about organic farmers being sued, and should have just kept it to an issue of patents. Or why not just sue over organic farmers being contaminated and the lost crop income?

    I will likely get flamed for this by those not willing to read the actual legal documents and who just want to be angry at Monsanto and the government – but the failure here was that these advocacy lawyers, associations, and other groups made a case more about fanfare and beating drums and drawing attention to themselves (self promoting amongst our watchdogs is necessary, but sometimes it seems to be driving the agenda!) – didn’t spend enough time putting together a good legal argument. That is what is truly disappointing in all this – the wasted opportunity.

    • Dear FarmJournal,

      This lawsuit doesn’t prevent others who are contaminated from bringing
      lawsuits for that injury. However, without this lawsuit to protect
      organic farmers from being accused of patent infringement, Monsanto
      could always sue any of those farmers who bring injury suits for patent
      infringement, because they would be conceding they have possession of
      Monsanto’s transgenic seed. This was discussed during the oral
      argument on January 31, and so you may want to read the transcript if you’d like to
      know more about it.
      Basically, if I sue Monsanto’s customer for contaminating me, what’s to stop Monsanto from suing me for patent infringement as a way to protect their client? Answer, nothing, other
      than this lawsuit to set precedent that Monsanto cannot bring such
      patent infringement lawsuits against those who are contaminated.

      Jim Gerritsen, President
      Organic Seed Growers and Trade Assn
      Montrose, Colorado

    • One question about the suit why was it paecld in a New York City Court10?What was the strategy in that decision the urban center of capital, corporations and the like the place of no farms and a judge who may not have any connection or understanding of organic seeds, organic food, or small farmers?Did anyone consider the enormity of Monsanto’s influence in the Democratic Party, and also the Republican one? Wouldn’t that also include the courts and any way they can find to hold onto their profits?These reactionary scientists have been killing people before the Vietnam war, and during it.There are three organizations I get e-mail from all opposing Monsanto but why didn’t the other two join in the legal action? Do you all talk to each other or have you different political views? Isn’t the first contradiction to unite to batter Monsanto into court and sue them for damages? Ever since Canadian Percy Schmieser’s case Monsanto has been damaging farmers. If each organization goes it alone they remain weaker then the influence, money, political connections, greed, and viciousness in the Monsanto corporation. This is not a dispute that should be looked at as if the beast running amuck is a well behaved corporation without legal back room deals, tricks, international manipulation, revolving door, in the Clinton and Obama administrations, and the Republican ones and on Wall Street. Occupy Monsanto orat least unite the three groups in a legal thrust in multiple directions at horrific practices of this US corporation.Why didn’t these two other organizations join in? (Jeffry Smith) (ronnie Cummins) Did they? Did anyone talk to them? Did they know about the suit ? Is this a one group fight? Liberals who think the courts will bring justice? Individual organizations who want to stand alone, and can’t join, unite, or work with others? Heh both sides this is the big time, and Monsanto has more money and influence in all the political parties and governments (Brazil, Argentina and and and ,..) then the three organizations put together. Get serious learn from La Via Campesina food sovereignty practice would help harden the position. Get the two other organizations and their members to join in an appeal and a resistance movement of quality- stop fidgeting and realize you are opposing the US Commerce Department, the Department of Agriculture, the Obama administration and the conservative courts. Doesn’t the US military buy Round up Ready to spew around their compounds in 142 countries? When the UFW boycott of grapes took hold in liberal enclaves the US military purchased tones for the boys in Vietnam (heh heh LBJ . ) nice people friendly US military protecting our freedoms. (Jeffry Smith) (ronnie Cumminsjoin up!!!! Unite!!!

  5. For a company like Monsanto, to have the right to bully and put farmers out of work. Is actually against our God given Constitutional rights. Judge Buchwald is a corrupt judge who will one day be held accountable for her decision. I’m proud that the farmers are not giving up, they have a right to feed us healthy sustainable products, that are good for the land, good for our health, and good for our future.

  6. Obviously this judge knows nothing of horticulture or of Monsanto. The only absurdity is the complete short-sightedness of this ruling.

    • Thanks for your inquiry, Mike. We are ieendd against GMOs. The lawsuit is seeking protection for organic farmers who become inadvertently contaminated with GMOs, in other words it is intended to protect farmers who want nothing to do with GMO seeds but become contaminated and are then liable for a lawsuit from Monsanto. It’s not that organic farmers want to steal GMO technology, but rather GMO technology is contaminating their seed supply. Food Democracy Now! has been a great partner in helping us to get the word out and we can assure you that they have the same goals in mind. Additionally, as an organic farmer the use of GMO technology is not allowed, so organic farmers who become contaminated are at risk of losing their organic certification and consumer base.

      • As a small, small entity with regard to heirloom and organic farming, I am very concerned about all of this. I have a background in Environmental Toxicology and as an undergrad turned down a very lucrative position with Dow Chemical. My background includes pesticide tox as well as human health issues with regard to environmental contaminants. I consider myself very middle of the road in most issues. While I am a proponent of biotech with regard to MEDICAL/human health breakthroughs I am NOT a proponent of GMOS, etc when it comes to this aspect of biotechnology.
        As a middle aged person who has come to this newest career at a time when I can afford to do so (and because I have always loved “digging in the dirt”), I am reconsidering returning to school, this time for an ag law degree. This helps to spur me on to do so.

    • I salute you for tnakig a stand to protect the family farmers, and organic producers of food for this country and the planet. We unfortunately need to fight to protect the food, water, and air of this planet. Nothing can be taken for granted anymore. Without standing up for this, those with money will buy the influence and votes of the politicians. Even now the head of the FDA is a former employee of those he is regulating. This revolving door has compromised all our government should stand for.

  7. it was an excessive decision to dismiss the case instead of hearing the very real concerns of farmers who are not involved in large subsidized agriculture. douglas carroll

  8. Today received an email from Dave Murphy and am unable to respond at any of the link. The required email field did no respond to cursor. Only the state arrow key and message boxes were active.

    I am very much in favor of the farmers and their fight against contaminated seed and Monsanto’s seed drift and control.

    Donna Barman

  9. Farmers have to be protected. They cannot be held responsible for seed drift. We have to be able to control GMOs.

  10. Well, we know that the whole system is corrupt and sold out to deep pockets. This is another proof of how ridiculous our judicial system is…I hope her and her family, which I can’t imagine she has, keeps eating GMO’s, maybe then she’ll change her mind?

  11. We need to stop the dictatorship that’s going on with Monsanto. Farmers should have a choice on how they grow their food and consumers should have a choice with what they put in their bodies

  12. This is precisely why consumers in Europe campaigned against having any GM content in their food. Which led to the major UK supermarkets combining to assure everyone they would not sell own brand products using GM crops.

    Monsanto regard this as restriction of trade!

    We see as having access to good food even when it’s not completely organic.

    • This GM seed legal thing is so bizarre! I’m rmnadieg of a big garden this summer, inspired by Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal, Vegetable, Miracle book and a visit to Mark and Kristin Kimball’s farm (and my wife putting me on a plant-strong diet), so I’d love to include some of your seeds. I was drawn to your website by the name (via your tweet to k_kimball Dec 7) because my wife grew up on a family pickle farm/packer here in Ohio ( Pickles was the nickname her girl scouts gave her). OK, now I’m going to go enjoy looking at the rest of your site thanks!

      • Let me, as a friend of this cause, play Devil’s adavcote.Can anyone point out on what page of the judge’s ruling she Ridicules Farmers’ Right to Grow Food Without Fear, Contamination and Economic Harm ? Or makes an error of fact or law? She does call one of the plaintiff’s contentions lame’ (and it does look pretty weak) , but it’s the quality of the case being made that she’s scornful of, not the right to live without fear.I’m definitely anti-Monsanto, anti-GM and anti-patenting, but I’m new to this case. Can anyone tell me what evidence of threatening behaviour was put before the judge? She implies that if there had been such evidence, this could have gone differently. Thus there is no evidence that defendants have commenced litigation against anyone standing in similar stead to plaintiffs. . What evidence has she discounted?Her ruling is basically that making a declaration as the plaintiffs wanted is out of her jurisdiction.Yes, your patent laws are stupid, and your litigious culture is dangerous, and Monsanto likely has the government in its pocket and farmers over a barrel. That doesn’t make this judge’s decision wrong. She can only go by the admissable evidence and the law.The trouble here seems to be all those cases that settled rather than going to court, and the aggressive investigations’. They probably don’t count as evidence.

  13. I am not a farmer but have relatives and friends who are. This decision by one person is a travesty. A subsequent trial with a jury might be more equitable and sensible. That procedure would ensure that one person– a judge– could not be swayed or influenced by a corporate giant to do its bidding or intent. This is too easily a miscarriage of justice.
    JP

  14. If farmers are not allowed to protect their farms or are held responsible for stray seeds in their fields, how will the people be able to choose and how is this helping the coveted capitalists and competition that helps keep prices affordable?

  15. Is this Judge possibly on the payroll because using common sense doesn’t seem her forte. It is disgusting that she is allowing/forcing GMO foods into the lives of the very people she is supposed to protect. Wow

  16. I would just have to say that this is a ridiculous judgement, and I certainly hope in response – that these farmers argue that Monsanto product unlawfully was trespassing on their property- THAT could be used as an arguement!

  17. These are the bullying tactics of fascism. And Judge Buchwald’s decision prompts me to question her intelligence and social awareness.

  18. What a blow to us Farmers & Ranchers !!! We all need to stand together United and Strong go forward with the back bone that formed this country !!! We are headed for tuff times people pull up on your boot straps and hunker in……country folks will servive

  19. I side with the organic farmers, and it is evident that either the judge in this case is blind to the fact that Monsanto is destroying our food, or else she is totally blind to the truth and uneducated to what is fair and right. I am angry at her lack of fairness and her desire to side with an evil company such as Monsanto, which is destroying our food. This court decision is a travesty and a slap in the face go people who buy food and to the farmers. I would call this sin agins humanity.
    Molly Peterson

  20. Of course, this judge knows perfectly well the implecations of Monsanto’s seeds blowing all over other farming neighbors and what it does to their crops. And even the ground water and soil is contaminating not only the Monsanto farm but other too. The danger of all the pesticides, GMOs etc. is killing us the consumer. I guess that is the idea that Monsanto ruin the land for everyone and that there will never be organic farming. They control the people that way.

    • Thank you for standing up for us to the bneotchiology industry. GMO’s are like a hostile takeover of our soil and land. If consumers knew what they were eating, they would choose not to eat genetically modified food, but , of course we have no labeling, and our regulatory agencies are working against the people, not for them. Seed is a sacred birthright, not a commodity for profit.

  21. Let me, as a friend of this cause, play Devil’s advocate.

    Can anyone point out on what page of the judge’s ruling she “Ridicules Farmers’ Right to Grow Food Without Fear, Contamination and Economic Harm”? Or makes an error of fact or law? She does call one of the plaintiff’s contentions ‘lame’ (and it does look pretty weak) , but it’s the quality of the case being made that she’s scornful of, not the right to live without fear.

    I’m definitely anti-Monsanto, anti-GM and anti-patenting, but I’m new to this case. Can anyone tell me what evidence of threatening behaviour was put before the judge? She implies that if there had been such evidence, this could have gone differently. “Thus there is no evidence that defendants have commenced litigation against anyone standing in similar stead to plaintiffs.“. What evidence has she discounted?

    Her ruling is basically that making a declaration as the plaintiffs wanted is out of her jurisdiction.

    Yes, your patent laws are stupid, and your litigious culture is dangerous, and Monsanto likely has the government in its pocket and farmers over a barrel. That doesn’t make this judge’s decision wrong. She can only go by the admissable evidence and the law.

    The trouble here seems to be all those cases that settled rather than going to court, and the ‘aggressive investigations’. They probably don’t count as evidence.

    • Dear John,
      The specific basis for appeal will be presented in a brief to the Court
      of Appeals at the appropriate time if and when an appeal is taken.
      However, just a few points from the ruling. On page 6, Judge Buchwald says, “Nevertheless,
      plaintiffs allege without specification that defendants have accused
      certain non-intentional users of Monsanto’s seed of patent
      infringement and threatened them with litigation.” However, that’s not
      accurate, as plaintiffs specifically identified such parties in, for example, our Complaint – see pages 46-47. In discussing some of these cases later in her opinion, the judge discusses some of these instances. See page 15 of the ruling. However, for example, in discussing the Nelsons she
      relies on Monsanto’s allegations relating thereto, not any finding of
      fact that the Nelson’s were not contaminated. Judge Buchwald also fails
      to mention at all the Runyans, who are discussed in detail in the
      Complaint. These are errors of fact.
      Regarding errors of law, just to identify one, Judge Buchwald on page
      21 of her ruling, in footnote 9, asserts that an entire line of Supreme Court cases
      regarding standing are “wholly inapposite” and with that she chooses to
      ignore them. This is per se error. Her conclusion that other farmers
      are not in “similar stead” as you say, is also incorrect as a matter of
      law, as there need not be “similar stead” between those a patentee has
      sued and a declaratory judgment plaintiff in order for the plaintiff to
      have standing.

      Jim Gerritsen, President
      Organic Seed Growers and Trade Assn

  22. It comes down to which side the judge believed: a) Monsanto, WHICH (not “who”) claims to be falsely accused of anti-organic bullying, or b) the family farmers, WHO know Monsanto ruthlessly brutalizes small growers worldwide. Profit-backed lies and distortions ruled in this case.

    Monsanto judge-picked this case. Naomi Buch(en)wald should have read the history of coal miners’ struggles with Big Coal in early 20th century to familiarize herself with sociopathic behaviors of bully corporations. They lie, cheat, murder and extort with impunity; they are not to be believed. Monsanto would never have put the case to her unless they knew she would be comfortable with their Naziesque sensibilities. That’s how big corporations roll.

    This story as as old as Cain and Abel. Problem is, the poisonous consequences of letting Monsanto get away with agricultural rape for profit now extend over the entire planet and well into the future, neither of which matter a damn to Monsanto … nor, apparently, to some judges.

  23. One question about the suit — why was it placed in a New York City Court?
    What was the strategy in that decision – the urban center of capital, corporations and the like the place of no farms and a judge who may not have any connection or understanding of organic seeds, organic food, or small farmers?
    Did anyone consider the enormity of Monsanto’s influence in the Democratic Party, and also the Republican one? Wouldn’t that also include the courts and any way they can find to hold onto their profits?
    These reactionary scientists have been killing people before the Vietnam war, and during it.
    There are three organizations I get e-mail from – all opposing Monsanto… but why didn’t the other two join in the legal action? Do you all talk to each other or have you different political views? Isn’t the first contradiction to unite to batter Monsanto into court and sue them for damages? Ever since Canadian Percy Schmieser’s case Monsanto has been damaging farmers. If each organization goes it alone – they remain weaker then the influence, money, political connections, greed, and viciousness in the Monsanto corporation. This is not a dispute that should be looked at as if the beast running amuck is a well behaved corporation — without legal back room deals, tricks, international manipulation, revolving door, in the Clinton and Obama administrations, and the Republican ones — and on Wall Street. Occupy Monsanto or
    at least unite the three groups in a legal thrust in multiple directions at horrific practices of this US corporation.
    Why didn’t these two other organizations join in? nfo@responsibletechnology.org (Jeffry Smith) ronniecummins@organicconsumers.org (ronnie Cummins)
    Did they? Did anyone talk to them? Did they know about the suit ? Is this a one group fight? Liberals who think the courts will bring justice? Individual organizations who want to stand alone, and can’t join, unite, or work with others? Heh both sides — this is the big time, and Monsanto has more money and influence in all the political parties and governments (Brazil, Argentina and and and ,..) then the three organizations put together. Get serious learn from “La Via Campesina — food sovereignty –practice would help harden the position. Get the two other organizations and their members to join in an appeal and a resistance movement of quality- stop fidgeting and realize you are opposing the US Commerce Department, the Department of Agriculture, the Obama administration and the conservative courts. Doesn’t the US military buy Round up Ready to spew around their compounds in 142 countries?
    When the UFW boycott of grapes took hold in liberal enclaves the US military purchased tones for the boys in Vietnam (heh heh LBJ…. ) nice people friendly US military protecting our freedoms.
    info@responsibletechnology.org (Jeffry Smith) ronniecummins@organicconsumers.org (ronnie Cummins
    join up!!!! Unite!!!

  24. When the time comes and most of humanity stands united, the karma of Monsantos and all those judges and politician who have supported them will be “hell to pay.” But the time WILL COME. The FDA is also to blame for approving GMOs without conducting a single health study or reading a single research paper by those who did and discovered the many damaging effects on biological organisms. Everyone eventually reaps what they sow.

  25. Since the conclusions I draw from the OSGATA et. al. v. Monsanto ruling are very different from other responses posted on this page I will first state that I DO support OSGATA’s policies, I AM very concerned about GMO & other aspects of conventional agriculture that appear to be both unsustainable and unhealthy, and finally I AM NOT a lawyer. I share these thoughts in hope that OSGATA et. al. will be successful in the pursuit of their objectives.

    I read Judge Buchwald’s ruling. I also read the ruling on Prasco LLC v Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation that is prominently featured in Buchwald’s ruling. I viewed the video of Daniel Ravicher’s speech at the National Heirloom Expo and have done what I can to learn in a short time what “declaratory judgement”, “subject matter jurisdiction”, “justiciability” and Article III of the Constitution mean in the context of patent law in a federal court.

    My conclusion is that in pursuing a declaratory judgement relative to Monsanto’s patents in a Federal Court (basically suing Monsanto to prevent Monsanto from suing others for patent infringement) OSGATA et. al. may playing Monsanto’s game under rules that appear to be very favorable to Monsanto. While there may be much evidence of harm done by Monsanto to OSGATA et. al. or a least evidence of valid reasons to be concerned about future harm, the abstract and (to me) bizarre structure & function of a declaratory judgement action rendered that evidence moot in OSGATA et. al.’s case.

    At the risk of sounding even more naive than I have already, I ask why OSGATA et. al. did not pursue other legal action such as challenging the safety of GMO food, challenging the validity of patents on life forms, calling Monsanto to task for environmental damage caused by their products or challenging Monsanto’s business practices?

    Sincerely, SH

    • Dear SH,

      The OSGATA et al plaintiffs have to have standing to bring any legal challenge, so the issues
      regarding standing under the Declaratory Judgment Act would be raised in
      an action arising under any other statute or doctrine. There are other
      lawsuits involving challenges to the approval of transgenic seed,
      including principally those brought by the Center for Food Safety, which
      is a co-plaintiff in this case.

      Jim Gerritsen, President
      Organic Seed Growers and Trade Assn

  26. Well this explains why bread has been making me sick. It’s not quite a full out gluten issue, but there is something wrong when I eat bread or wheat. I guess all those pesticides are doing their thing. I will be selling my stock in Monsanto. yes, I have stock in this bully. I guess I never realized the whole picture. Shame on the judge for not allowing farmers to have their say.

    And what’s up with the patent office allowing them to “claim” rights on seeds that have been around for centuries? There is big error in the patent office. I fear for the public. Nothing is truly safe.

    I have noticed more families turning their front yards into small plots to grow their own vegetables. I only hope they are using true seeds that are not tainted with GMO or else Monsanto will take their house.

    So sad. Monsanto thinks it will win. I think the American people have had enough.

    • It’s amazing that a preiuocs seed,a gift from our Earth that was here long before Monsanto and not even theirs in the beginning, can be GM, patented as theirs, then sue farmers that do not want any part of this toxic seed. Everyday I purchase organic food and seeds is my votes to all the organic farms that I stand behind and support 100%

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

HTML tags are not allowed.

Address

P.O. Box 362
Washington, ME 04574
Phone: 207. 809. 7530

Donate

OSGATA needs your support! Please help us in our work of protecting and developing the organic seed trade! Click here to find out more:

Donate to OSGATA

Membership Benefits

-Cross promotion of member products and services

-Access to a members-only listserv for networking

-State and federal lobbying services

-Political action updates on state and federal level

-Access to members only list-serv for networking and sharing seed industry information

-OSGATA's regular Seed for Thought newsletter

Become a Member