User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 25 to 32 of 41

Thread: Plant Patent

  1. #25
    OMG h8 pings MrFlyTrap2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    DeKalb, IL
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by PlantAKiss View Post
    Its definitely a passionate topic with view on both sides of the mirror.
    Totally true, it's just the nature of the beast. While on one hand it can protect people, their efforts, their ideas, from large monstrous corporations.... it alienates others, inventors, hobbyists, small businesses from doing things in the world.

    I think there's an extra painful sting for us since our hybrids are just built off A + B = Ab and for some species we only get 9 letters in the case of Sarracenias, 1 in the case of VFT's, etc... So it ends up with hurt feelings when someone 'owns' the mix Ab. It's not like it's a Sarracenia mixed with a lemon or something. lol

    But again, the law is the law, break it at will, suffer the consequences as applied.
    Last edited by MrFlyTrap2; 06-17-2008 at 10:51 PM. Reason: oops I think it's 9
    My Grow List

    "It is only by studying nature that can we ever hope to defeat it."

  2. #26
    wmgorum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    230
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think there's some misunderstandings over plant patents (or maybe even the definition of a cultivar) on some people's parts. If I cross S. purpurea and S. oreophila and I register one plant as a cultivar, S. "Purple Oreo" and then patent it, my patent covers that one specific specimen, not every plant ever made by crossing S. purpurea and S. oreophila. Even if I crossed the same two parent plants again, I wouldn't end up with that exact same plant. Every seed grown plant is unique. That's why you can't reproduce some cultivars from seed and they must be propagated asexually. I think one of the other patented plants (like Red Bug or whatever it is) says that you can't reproduce the plant asexually but that doesn't mean you can't use it as a seed or pollen parent.

    I'm not saying that I agree with patenting a plant but I think you need to see the breeder's perspective. If you look at agriculture and I spend a million dollars developing a tomato that grows like nobody's business and can't carry salmonella and I sell the seeds and every farmer out there keeps one tomato's worth of seeds to plant again next year, I've just lost my million dollar investment because no one is buying the seeds from me and I now can't recoup my investment and I go broke.

    Just my $0.02.

    Will

  3. #27
    OMG h8 pings MrFlyTrap2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    DeKalb, IL
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for the clarification Will, believe I've got the agriculture side stuck in my head which not only patents their plants, but licenses how they are used as well.
    My Grow List

    "It is only by studying nature that can we ever hope to defeat it."

  4. #28
    Hort. School dropout X 2
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,276
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Some good points taken, Will.
    The other thing plant patents are kinda pricey.not sure of the exact amount,I would never apply for one unless I had soem abcking from somebody filthy rich like bill gates, oprah, backing me in my business venture.Like that is going to happen,LOL
    Every seed that you plant ,doesn't sprout.
    Every seed that sprouts, doesn't make it to maturity.
    Every cutting that you stick doesn't grow roots.
    Every cutting that roots doesn't grow to a small plant.
    Every small plant doesn't reach maturity.


    Who needs speelcheck?

  5. #29
    Stay chooned in for more! Clint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Metro Atlanta Area
    Posts
    9,681
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MrFlyTrap2 View Post
    Totally true, it's just the nature of the beast. While on one hand it can protect people, their efforts, their ideas, from large monstrous corporations.... it alienates others, inventors, hobbyists, small businesses from doing things in the world.

    I think there's an extra painful sting for us since our hybrids are just built off A + B = Ab and for some species we only get 9 letters in the case of Sarracenias, 1 in the case of VFT's, etc... So it ends up with hurt feelings when someone 'owns' the mix Ab. It's not like it's a Sarracenia mixed with a lemon or something. lol

    But again, the law is the law, break it at will, suffer the consequences as applied.
    Not really. Think of all of the subspecies, varieties, and hybrid you can use to make a new hybrid in the case of Sarracenia.

  6. #30
    Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, England PlantAKiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia/Zone 7
    Posts
    10,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If I cross S. purpurea and S. oreophila and I register one plant as a cultivar, S. "Purple Oreo" and then patent it, my patent covers that one specific specimen, not every plant ever made by crossing S. purpurea and S. oreophila. Even if I crossed the same two parent plants again, I wouldn't end up with that exact same plant.
    That is true about hybrids...however, if out of a batch of same-parent seed you had 10 plants that fit the described attributes for the cultivar, then it IS the cultivar. Cultivar registration doesn't go so far as to get into genetic composition of a plant (i.e. cultivars being required to have exact genetic structure). It goes only by the described/published attributes of the plants and more than one offspring of a hybrid can exhibit those attributes. So it is possible to re-create a cultivar via seed although more reliably via cloning.

    You could possibly stand in the middle of Wilkerson's Bog and see many 'Leah Wilkerson"s but that doesn't mean all the Leah's came from the same seed pod (parent plant).
    "Fox terriers are born with about four times as much original sin in them as other dogs." - Jerome K. Jerome

  7. #31
    wmgorum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    230
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm no expert on cultivars by any means, I'm just going by my understanding of them!

    For example, here's the cultivar description of "Leah Wilkerson" from the ICPS website:

    Sarracenia ‘Leah Wilkerson’
    Submitted: 12 April 2004
    This naturally occurring Sarracenia hybrid was a chance find while visiting a bog on private property---with permission---in Walton County, Florida in May of 2002. Actually it was hard to miss this outstanding S. x moorei cross, as it stood head and shoulders above all the Sarracenia flava and Sarracenia leucophylla plants in the bog because of its sheer size. I have observed this plant in the field for two years and in cultivation for one year. Unlike most S. x moorei crosses, it displays unbelievable hybrid vigor. The original genet measured over two meters (six feet) across with more than fifty pitchers; the tallest of these measured 130 cm (50 inches) tall, while the heights of the majority of the other pitchers measured between 86-97 cm (34-38 inches). The average lateral measurement of the hood was 17 cm (6.5 inches).
    In addition to its gigantic proportions, this hybrid is outstanding because of its stunning coloration. The lower three quarters of the pitchers are lime green, and the pitcher tops are lemon yellow with large areoles and light red veining. The ala is lined in red. The nectar roll is pronounced, undulated and mottled with red; this pigmentation becomes more solid near the column, and forms a throat blotch typical of the S. flava var. rugelii parentage. The lid is particularly colorful with an overall pale yellow color (verging on white) with regularly spaced strong red veining throughout. From a distance the lid takes on a peachy golden cast. The edge of the lid is edged in red and ruffled, typical of the S. leucophylla parent.
    This hybrid produces most of its pitchers in the spring---obviously an influence from the Sarracenia flava in its ancestry. In cultivation, these spring pitchers regularly reach 86-91 cm (34-36 inches) in height. A second flush of pitchers is also produced in the fall, and as in S. leucophylla, these pitchers are even larger, measuring up to 96 cm (38 inches) tall.
    The cultivar name honors Mrs. Leah Wilkerson, who has lived her entire life on the property where this plant occurs. About one-third this property is bog habitat. As her father before her did, Mrs. Wilkerson makes sure that the wire grass pasture gets burned every winter. While the family conducted these burns to maintain the pasture for livestock, they were providing the exact conditions to allow the other native plants to thrive, including the pitcher plants. So the name Sarracenia ‘Leah Wilkerson’ honors both Mrs. Wilkerson and her stewardship.
    Vegetative propagation is necessary to maintain the unique features of this hybrid. I obtained written permission to collect a sample of this specimen, and it is presently in a private tissue culture lab. Those interested in obtaining specimens of this plant should contact me using the address below.

    As I read it, you MUST use vegetative propagation to propagate this plant. If Brooks Garcia patented this plant, then we'd have to have his permission to reproduce the plant. If you collect seed from 'Leah Wilkerson' then the offspring are NOT 'Leah Wilkerson' going by the cultivar description and the patent wouldn't cover seed grown progeny of the parent. As a result, if you were in Wilkerson's Bog and you saw many plants similar to 'Leah Wilkerson' they wouldn't be 'Leah Wilkerson'.

    There are some cultivars that can be reproduced from seed based on the cultivar description (such as D. 'Ivan's Paddle') and those would come under the patent if that plant was patented. That being said, I disagree with the statement "cultivar registration doesn't go so far as to get into genetic compositon of a plant." I feel it does, because if it did not, there would not be limitations placed on how the cultivar could be reproduced in order to preserve the qualities of the particular specimen. The only way to maintain the qualities that made this plant worthy of cultivar status is to maintain the genetics that control the qualities.

    An example: there's named Sarracenia cultivar 'Daniel Rudd.' I've heard allegations that many of the plants circulated as 'Daniel Rudd' are not the real thing. Someone attempted to cross the same species to recreate the cultivar and selected a plant similar to the cultivar but it's NOT the cultivar. Another example is S. oreophila 'Don Schnell.' The only exisiting specimen of this cultivar was lost before it could be reproduced, so it's lost forever.

    I hope what I think I know about cultivars aren't too off base and how all of it ties in to the issue of plant patenting. I believe that the plant is only covered by the patent if it fits the cultivar description.

    If my understanding of cultivars is not correct, PLEASE somebody correct me! ;-) I also hope this is clear 'cause i was trying to type this out in chunks between working with clients since I'm doing this at the office!

    Quote Originally Posted by PlantAKiss View Post
    That is true about hybrids...however, if out of a batch of same-parent seed you had 10 plants that fit the described attributes for the cultivar, then it IS the cultivar. Cultivar registration doesn't go so far as to get into genetic composition of a plant (i.e. cultivars being required to have exact genetic structure). It goes only by the described/published attributes of the plants and more than one offspring of a hybrid can exhibit those attributes. So it is possible to re-create a cultivar via seed although more reliably via cloning.

    You could possibly stand in the middle of Wilkerson's Bog and see many 'Leah Wilkerson"s but that doesn't mean all the Leah's came from the same seed pod (parent plant).

  8. #32
    Doing it wrong until I do it right. xvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Zone 8
    Posts
    5,594
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by wmgorum View Post
    As I read it, you MUST use vegetative propagation to propagate this plant.
    This is correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgorum View Post
    As a result, if you were in Wilkerson's Bog and you saw many plants similar to 'Leah Wilkerson' they wouldn't be 'Leah Wilkerson'.
    This is also correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgorum View Post
    There are some cultivars that can be reproduced from seed based on the cultivar description (such as D. 'Ivan's Paddle') and those would come under the patent if that plant was patented. That being said, I disagree with the statement "cultivar registration doesn't go so far as to get into genetic compositon of a plant." I feel it does, because if it did not, there would not be limitations placed on how the cultivar could be reproduced in order to preserve the qualities of the particular specimen. The only way to maintain the qualities that made this plant worthy of cultivar status is to maintain the genetics that control the qualities.
    This also applies to S. leucophylla'Hurricane Creek White' (which I disagree with). In these examples, the cultivar is a population of plants. According to the ICPS description:

    In order to maintain this cultivar’s unique hardiness, color, and size characters, do not attach the cultivar name to any seedlings that do not show the large white pitchers of this Sarracenia leucophylla cultivar.)
    The cultivar system is in and of itself totally messed up and very arcane. It needs some serious work to be taken as credible. Depending on the species, odds of actually scoring a real cultivar are pretty small. I seriously doubt that I'll ever own a cultivar status Dionea because of the growth patterns of vft's and environmental conditions. People see something similar to a 'Big Mouth' and say, that's a big mouth! and label it as such.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgorum View Post
    Another example is S. oreophila 'Don Schnell.' The only exisiting specimen of this cultivar was lost before it could be reproduced, so it's lost forever.
    Ideally, a plant being considered for cultivar registration should be vegetatively divided by the owner and sent to a few different growers to ensure that the unique characteristics of the plant (the ones that make it "worthy" of cultivar status) are not simply because of the environmental conditions surrounding the plant.

    I had a bunch more typed about the cultivar system, but I realized it was more of a rant and not even a relevant one.

    xvart.
    "The tragedy of life is not that every man loses; but that he almost wins."

    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •