resource management and (5).Role as a bioreactor to produce raw materials for pharmaceuticals and other industries.
For critics, there are four main objections:
(1) Consumers do not have sufficient information about Genetically Modified Organisms; (2).There may be potential detrimental effects from eating GM foods, while there have not yet been objective studies to identify such effects, if they exist; (3).There may be unexpected environmental problems; (4).Genetic Modified crops may violate certain religious beliefs and traditions.
5. LIABILITY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION
Liability and redress is usually conceived as a tool to provide compensation for harm caused by a person or entity engaging in an activity which can have negative …show more content…
Such activity was unanimously found by the United States Supreme Court to constitute patent infringement in Bowman v. Monsanto Co. (2013) . The case began in 2007, when Monsanto sued Indiana farmer Vernon Hugh Bowman who in 1999 bought seed for his second planting from a grain elevator – the same elevator that he and others sold their transgenic crops . The elevator sold the soybeans as commodities, not as seeds for planting . Bowman tested the new seeds, and found that as he had expected, some were resistant to glyphosate. He intentionally replanted his harvest of Genetically Modified seeds in subsequent years, supplementing them with more soybeans he bought at the elevator . He informed Monsanto of his activities . Monsanto stated that he was infringing their patents because the soybeans he bought from the elevator were new products that he purchased for use as seeds without a license from Monsanto; Bowman stated that he had not infringed due to patent exhaustion on the first sale of seed to whatever farmers had produced the crops that he bought from the elevator, on the grounds that for seed, all future generations are embodied in the first generation that was originally sold . In 2009 the district court ruled in favor of Monsanto; on appeal, the Federal Circuit upheld the verdict . Bowman appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which granted review , then unanimously affirmed the Federal Circuit on May 13, 2013
For critics, there are four main objections:
(1) Consumers do not have sufficient information about Genetically Modified Organisms; (2).There may be potential detrimental effects from eating GM foods, while there have not yet been objective studies to identify such effects, if they exist; (3).There may be unexpected environmental problems; (4).Genetic Modified crops may violate certain religious beliefs and traditions.
5. LIABILITY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION
Liability and redress is usually conceived as a tool to provide compensation for harm caused by a person or entity engaging in an activity which can have negative …show more content…
Such activity was unanimously found by the United States Supreme Court to constitute patent infringement in Bowman v. Monsanto Co. (2013) . The case began in 2007, when Monsanto sued Indiana farmer Vernon Hugh Bowman who in 1999 bought seed for his second planting from a grain elevator – the same elevator that he and others sold their transgenic crops . The elevator sold the soybeans as commodities, not as seeds for planting . Bowman tested the new seeds, and found that as he had expected, some were resistant to glyphosate. He intentionally replanted his harvest of Genetically Modified seeds in subsequent years, supplementing them with more soybeans he bought at the elevator . He informed Monsanto of his activities . Monsanto stated that he was infringing their patents because the soybeans he bought from the elevator were new products that he purchased for use as seeds without a license from Monsanto; Bowman stated that he had not infringed due to patent exhaustion on the first sale of seed to whatever farmers had produced the crops that he bought from the elevator, on the grounds that for seed, all future generations are embodied in the first generation that was originally sold . In 2009 the district court ruled in favor of Monsanto; on appeal, the Federal Circuit upheld the verdict . Bowman appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which granted review , then unanimously affirmed the Federal Circuit on May 13, 2013