The Green Files > Monsanto's Roundup Ready Patents Survive Appeal

[Patently-O: Patent Law Blog] First, although Scruggs never obtained a license to use the seeds, he was supposed to under Monsanto policy ”” therefore the sale was not “unrestricted.” Second, as the CAFC held in McFarling, rights to second generation seeds are lost by unencombered sale of first generation seeds. The fact that a patented technology can replicate itself does not give a purchaser the right to use replicated copies of the...

Previous [Previous] An Inconvenient Truth...

Next [Next] Keanu Reeves on Global Warming...

Some related posts from Technorati and Google.

Patentlaw.typepad.com[Patentlaw.typepad.com] Patently-O: Patent Law Blog: Monsanto Co. v. Homan McFarling (Fed ...: Because the first-generation seeds (sold by Monsanto) were nearly identical copies to the second-generation seeds, the court found that the patent scope includes both generations. Thus, the Court rejected McFarling's appeal and held that the Technology Agreement did not impermissibly extend Monsanto's rights.

Organicconsumers.org[Organicconsumers.org] Federal Court Rules Monsanto's Fines for Seed Saving AreExcessive: Watchdog group to monitor biotech, irradiated food, mad cow disease, gmo and .McFarling violated a Monsanto-held seed patent and ordered him to pay the .

[Patentlyobviousblog.com] Patently-O: Patent Law Blog: McFarling v. Monsanto: On Petition ...: In my quick review of the briefs for and against certiorari, it appears that Monsanto's attorneys have put their best foot forward by showing that there are no true circuit splits, a key feature in the Supreme Court's decision whether to accept a case on appeal. All the same, McFarling's case has a certain flair that may push the court to accept the case.

Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, ,