Ottawa, Canada
May 21, 2004
The
Canadian Seed Trade Association (CSTA) applauds the Supreme
Court of Canada ruling today on the Schmeiser vs. Monsanto
appeal. The decision protects the scientific methods used to
develop new seed technologies – benefiting farmers with
continued access to leading technologies.
“CSTA is pleased that today’s Supreme Court
decision recognizes that patents are an effective and necessary
tool for protecting intellectual property and rewarding
innovations in biotechnology,” said Tim Tregunno, CSTA
president.
On January 20, 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada
heard Percy Schmeiser’s appeal of a Federal Court of Appeal
decision that found the Bruno, Saskatchewan farmer liable for
violating Monsanto’s Roundup Ready gene patent in canola. This
was the first patent infringement case in Canada involving
Monsanto’s patented canola technology to be heard by the Federal
Court of Canada and challenging the validity of patent rights
for lower life forms under the Canadian Patent Act. Representing
the interests of its 165 seed company members, CSTA was an
independent intervener in that case and was asked by the Court
to comment on some specific, technical aspects of the case.
The CSTA presentation to the Supreme Court last
January included the following specific points:
-
There is no provision in the Patent Act which
creates an implied licence
for farmers to save and plant seeds
-
International treaties and discussions
recognize and support the practice of seed saving and
exchanging seed, making provisions for efforts aimed at the
conservation and preservation of plant genetic resources
-
Saving seed of a bred plant variety that does
not occur naturally, for future planting in a commercial
farming operation does not constitute genetic resource
conservation or preservation work
The Supreme Court judgment signals strong support
for intellectual property protection tools, such as Plant
Breeders’ Rights and patents that will continue to help Canadian
research and development to flourish and investment in seed and
agricultural research to flow in to Canada.
“It’s a victory for Canadian farmers – who are
now ensured access to leading seed technologies needed to
compete with our trading partners on a global basis,” said
Tregunno.
Canadian seed companies make developments in
crops possible through significant investments into research and
development activities, such as the $92.5 million they invested
in 2001 alone. These investments are dependent upon effective
intellectual property protection mechanisms, such as PBR and
patent protection to sustain them.
Headquartered in the nation’s capital, the CSTA
represents the interests of 165 member companies engaged in all
aspects of seed research, production and marketing, both
domestically and internationally. As a member organization
consisting of plant breeders, wholesalers, retailers and others,
CSTA is committed to fostering an environment conducive to
researching, developing, distributing and trading seed and
associated technologies – with the goal of bettering the choices
and successes of its members and their customers.
May 21, 2004
Supreme Court Judgment – Schmeiser vs. Monsanto
Question and
Answer Backgrounder
Q – Does the Canadian Seed Trade Association
approve of the May 21st Supreme Court judgment regarding the
Schmeiser vs. Monsanto Appeal?
A
–
CSTA applauds the Supreme Court judgment because Canadian
farmers are now ensured of access to leading seed technologies
needed to compete on a level playing field for years to come.
We are pleased that today’s Supreme Court decision recognizes
that patents are an effective and necessary tool for protecting
intellectual property and rewarding biotechnological inventions.
Intellectual property protection tools, such as Plant Breeders’
Rights and patents will continue to help Canadian research and
development to flourish and research dollars to flow in.
Technology developers will be able to continue to ensure that
clear, deliberate infringement
of their technology is stopped.
The CSTA is pleased that today’s Supreme Court decision
recognizes that patents are an effective and necessary tool for
protecting intellectual property and rewarding biotechnological
inventions.
Q
- What does the seed industry plan to do about patented seeds
showing up in farmer's fields?
A –
Technology developers are looking to stop clear, deliberate
infringement of their technology. Unexpected, trace amounts are
not deliberate and therefore would not be cause for companies
seeking patent protection.
The seed industry has never claimed 100% purity, in fact
low-level adventitious or unintentional presence is unavoidable
and should be expected in biological processes. It occurs
through natural pollen flow and mechanical handling.
International discussions are taking place with respect to
standardizing and validating seed sampling and testing
procedures so that realistic and practical tolerance levels can
be established.
Q - What are genetically modified crops
and why do we need them?
A
-
Genetically modified (GM) crops are those that have been
genetically enhanced using modern biotechnology to carry one or
more beneficial new traits. The traits most commonly introduced
by genetic modification are resistance to insects and tolerances
to herbicides. Regulatory agencies ensure and many studies have
shown that GM crops and foods are as safe as their conventional
counterparts.
GM crops are becoming increasingly important to world
agriculture in general, and Canadian agriculture in particular.
They allow farmers to grow more food, better food, in ways that
are better for the environment. More and more studies are
quantifying the benefits of biotechnology. Benefits to farmers
include: improved weed control, higher yields from land
currently in production, limiting the risks of herbicide
resistance, reducing pesticide use and providing more options to
manage weeds and insects - all leading to improved farm
incomes. Consumer benefits include better quality food that
tastes better and keeps longer – produced in an economical
fashion.
There are numerous potential benefits to consumers in future
biotech innovations. For example, products with improved
nutritional qualities: tomatoes that ward off heart disease and
cancer, rice that is enriched with betacarotene to prevent
childhood blindness, allergenic free peanuts, wheat, soybeans
and milk, not to mention the range of plant-derived vaccines.
And we need this technology to feed an expanding and
increasingly affluent world population on a shrinking
agricultural land base.
For further information go to:
-
http://www.worldseed.org/FAQs.htm
-
http://www.croplife.ca/english/resourcecentre/bio-facts.html
-
http://www.whybiotech.com/
Other interveners in the Schmeiser vs. Monsanto Appeal and their
websites are:
- Canadian Canola Growers:
www.ccga.ca
-
AgWest Biotech:
www.agwest.sk.ca
-
BIOTECanada:
www.biotech.ca |
