Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumTrade deals criminalise farmers' seeds
Trade deals criminalise farmers' seeds
GRAIN | 18 November 2014 | Against the grain
What could be more routine than saving seeds from one season to the next? After all, that is how we grow crops on our farms and in our gardens. Yet from Guatemala to Ghana, from Mozambique to Malaysia, this basic practice is being turned into a criminal offence, so that half a dozen large multinational corporations can turn seeds into private property and make money from them. But people are fighting back and in several countries popular mobilisations are already forcing governments to put seed privatisation plans on hold.
Trade agreements have become a tool of choice for governments, working with corporate lobbies, to push new rules to restrict farmers' rights to work with seeds. Until some years ago, the most important of these was the World Trade Organization's (WTO) agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Adopted in 1994, TRIPS was, and still is, the first international treaty to establish global standards for intellectual property rights over seeds.1 The goal is to ensure that companies like Monsanto or Syngenta, which spend money on plant breeding and genetic engineering, can control what happens to the seeds they produce by preventing farmers from re-using them in much the same way as Hollywood or Microsoft try to stop people from copying and sharing films or software by putting legal and technological locks on them.
~snip~
Onslaught of FTAs
The North America Free Trade Agreement signed by Mexico, Canada and the US, at about the same time TRIPS was being finalised was one of the first trade deals negotiated outside the multilateral arena to carry with it the tighter seed privatisation noose. It obliged Mexico to join the UPOV club of countries giving exclusive rights to seed companies to stop farmers from recycling and reusing corporate seeds. This set a precedent for all US bilateral trade agreements that followed, while the European Union, the European Free Trade Association and Japan also jumped on the same idea.3
A nonstop process of diplomatic and financial pressure to get countries to privatise seeds through the back door (these trade deals are negotiated in secret) has been going on since then. The stakes are high for the seed industry. Globally, just 10 companies control 55% of the commercial seed market.4
More:
http://www.grain.org/article/entries/5070-trade-deals-criminalise-farmers-seeds
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Corporate supremacy.
Why would any citizen be in favor of corporate supremacy?
me b zola
(19,053 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)FBaggins
(26,748 posts)If a seed manufacturer insists that their product is only available for one growing season for the crop and you may not use it to produce your own seeds... then don't buy their seeds unless they provide such an incredible benefit over standard seeds that you're willing to make the sacrifice.
niyad
(113,335 posts)is going on.
It's so much easier to just post the point of confusion on a thread where people who care about the issue can provide that feedback rather than versions of "boy... are you dumb" nonsense.
I guess that's not you, eh?
niyad
(113,335 posts)need all the laughs we can get.
obxhead
(8,434 posts)By a neighbors GMO crop. Now your seeds you planned on harvesting are GMO seeds controlled by these laws.
The major producers of the GMO seeds are going after farmers for these violations as well.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)Say you have a nice, newly-painted white house. Its on the historcal register, and has always been painted white. Your neighbor decides to paint his house purple. But it's a very windy day! Lots of purple paint blows onto your house, spattering everywhere.
According to these trade deals, your neighbor bears no responsibility. In fact you have to pay him for the purple paint you 'stole.' Plus, you also have to pay rent to your neighbor from now on...
-app
FBaggins
(26,748 posts)You wouldn't just have to have some cross-pollination, it would have to successfully retain whatever the desired trait was (say "roundup ready" ... then you would have to "accidentally" kill off all of your non-modified crop ("oopsie... I just sprayed roundup on my crops by accident" ... then you would have to intentionally harvest what remained and use it for seed.
There's no plausible chain of events that would cause that to happen by accident.
In actually believable scenarios (some small percentage of your crop is cross-pollinated and you treat it just like any other part of your crop)... there's no way that they would be able to sue you.