CANNABIS DNA PROJECT

What's the goal here at the finish line? It sounds very corporate, Almost like a new a wave of seeds where some chemicals will be missing from the natural cannabis, Of let's say the 60's. Is this another way for governments and companies to control what we smoke? Maybe take out some of medicinal qualities so people remain dependent on the Pharmacies? The very reason cannabis was made illegal in the first place?

Where is the family tree, So people can look at it? Been 5 years now must be loaded with plants and history?

BigPhil said:

What's the goal here at the finish line? It sounds very corporate, Almost like a new a wave of seeds where some chemicals will be missing from the natural cannabis, Of let's say the 60's. Is this another way for governments and companies to control what we smoke? Maybe take out some of medicinal qualities so people remain dependent on the Pharmacies? The very reason cannabis was made illegal in the first place?

Where is the family tree, So people can look at it? Been 5 years now must be loaded with plants and history?

Click to expand...

I don't think we are supposed to talk about that here.
Some here have their financial future at stake.
Lets just say you will probably be trolled hard.
Good luck though.

Peace
Shag

I don't mean to discourage this conversation.
I just think those with an agenda will not want this talked about.

They have already stolen what they need, end of discussion.
End of game.
These folks are not stupid.
But they think we are.....

Fook those with bad agenda's, They might not want it talked about, But hay free world init lol.

BigPhil said:

Fook those with bad agenda's, They might not want it talked about, But hay free world init lol.

Click to expand...

I agree........Enter the trolls.......

Bunch of broken promises. From the inside man to his investors/handlers.. They didn't find what they were looking for and kicked em to the curb for the time wasted. They were looking for ownership of worked Cannabis, and found that the experts misled them with their ignorance. Look at the Phylos tree for example, it makes no sense at all. Omg all weed is related, wow! Strains are not products of laboratories, it's the environment that differentiates one line from another. You can't own a strain, only the farm.

Here's another one of these guys trying to play both sides. https://youtu.be/xNafA-hvnYw

Listen what he says about signing non disclosures yet wants to tell his local fans all about the plans of the corporations he attempts to consult.. And what are those plans? Trying to figure out how to own strains in a production methodology that doesn't produce strains.

do any of the Phylos gang work genetic alteration...like maybe CRISPR in a genetic sequence to produce the most awesome weed using the samples donated?


that would be something i could get behind instead of them trying to patent some variant that would be held up as the predecessor of all cannabis phylogeny to somehow get royalties on all grows???which is what i imagined as their purpose to begin with...

Thanks but the old thread is not intact.
It has been edited to the max.
Almost every post says:

Last edited by Sam_Skunkman; 12-06-2014 at 10:34 PM..

Your fears are for nothing.

the posts I saw deleted weren't off subject. Just a part of the discussion you apparently don't want to have, for some reason

If there is nothing to hide or to be worried about than why the deleted posts.

this attitude of shut up don't ask any questions just send me your seeds is the wrong approach.
The kind of people who have spent years collecting and preserving landraces are very passionate about what we do.
As well as not trusting of others intentions.

Some sent their live seeds directly to sam.
Quote sam
I can have live seeds DNA extracted here in the Netherlands

I wonder what happened to that live DNA that could be grown?

BY DNA DO YOU MEAN

DONT NEED ANYBODY?

So this phylos galaxy mumbo jumbo was some big pharma incorporated buy out to try to patent said reefer?

The galaxy represented what is wrong with most modern cannabis if I was looking at it properly.
I can not comment on this corp but from what I have read yes its already a done deal like Shaggy said .

Cannabis Breeder’s Rights ver 2.0



https://www.academia.edu/38353720/Cannabis_Breeder_s_Rights_ver_2.0.1.pdf

shaggyballs said:

Cannabis Breeder’s Rights ver 2.0


https://www.academia.edu/keypass/UH...r_s_Rights_ver_2.0?email_work_card=view-paper

Click to expand...

I am not able to access the site. Can you cut n paste if its not too much?

Not real readable, but there she is...

Not real readable, but there she is...

Cannabis Breeder’s Rights ver 2.0

Jerry Whiting

LeBlanc CNE, Inc. / SeattleE-mail:
LeBlancCNE@gmail.com
URL:
LeBlancCNE.com/cannabis-breeders-rights/
Released under Creative Commons license:
CC BY-ND 4.0 27jan19

Abstract
AlicensingframeworkforcannabisandhempbreederssimilartoCreativeCommonsforsoftwareand media.Twenty-twolicensedesignationsdescribepropagation,sales,andattributeconditions.This schemawassuggestedbyDJShortasameansofconveyingabreeder’sintentionsforthegenetics they release. [
www.LeBlancCNE.com/cannabis-breeders-rights/
]
DuringHempfest2015,DJShortexpressedadesireforawayto releasehisgeneticstothepublicwithsomedegreeofprotection and control over how they are used.
“I don’t want to own my strains. I don’t want to patent it. But mybiggest fear is that someone else will take my work and prevent me from working with it. And I see as the only solution to this is tomake all of this public domain and open source.”
DJ Short
https://youtu.be/0veCgnBJDU0?t=38m46s 38:46 markIvolunteeredtoreviewtheCreativeCommonslicensingschema [

creativecommons.org/]todeterminewhetherit’sappropriate forcannabisbreederstouse.Readingitcarefully,Irealizedthat CreativeCommonslicensesaregearedtowarddigitalcontentnot genetics.ForexampletheconceptofNoDerivs(CCBY-ND& CCNC-ND)istoobroadforbreederstousebecauseitdoesn’t distinguish cloning, seeding, and breeding.TheOpenSourceSeedInitiative[

osseeds.org/]addressesthe rightsassociatedwithseedsbuttheydefineanall-or-nothing approach.Seedsarereleasedfreeofanyrestrictions.Itoffers none of the parameters desired by hemp and cannabis breeders.
“YouhavethefreedomtousetheseOSSI-Pledgedseedsinany wayyouchoose.Inreturn,youpledgenottorestrictothers’use oftheseseedsortheirderivativesbypatentsorothermeans,and toincludethispledgewithanytransferoftheseseedsortheir derivatives.”
OSSI Pledge
https://osseeds.org/faqs/ TheCannabisBreeder’sRightscanpotentiallybeintegratedinto existing efforts like The Open Cannabis Project.[opencannabisproject.org ]
The Cannabis Breeder’s Rights Approach
CBRisawayforabreedertoconveytheirwishesandintentions alongwiththeirgenetics.TheCannabisBreeder’sRights addressesthreethingsanybreederisconcernedaboutwhen releasing a cultivar:• propagation• commerce

• attributionCannabisBreeder’sRights(CBR)accommodatesthosewho wanttoreleasetheirgeneticsinwaysmoreflexibleandnuanced thanU.S.patentprotection.Infact,CBRcanbeusedin alongsidepatentsandotherplantprotectionandlicensing schemas. They aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. Notonlyispropagationnotasimpleeither/orattribute,froma breeder’sperspectiveit’sperhapsthemostimportantofthethree attributesdefined.UnderCBReveryonehastherighttogrow, flower,andharvest.Carryingacultivarforwardthrough propagation,breedingorsalesiswhat’satstake(andwherethe money is).

CreativeCommonsdoesnotaddresstheissueofderivative worksinamannerthatworksforbreeders.CBRmakesthe distinctionbetweencloningandtissueculture,creatingseeds, andbreedingnewcultivars.Onecanclonecannabis(creating moreofwhatyoualreadyhave),passivelyallowplantstoseedor activelymanipulatethem(feminization),orbreedentirelynew cultivars.Abreedermaywanttoallowcloningbutdiscourage breeding.Orperhapstheyallowseedproductionfor backcrossing purposes but not for breeding new cultivars.MuchlikeCreativeCommons,CannabisBreeders’Rights addressescommercializationseparateandapartfromsharing withoutremuneration.Breederscanspecifythattheircultivarsbe sold or given away for free.



Anotherattributenaddresseswhethersomeonewantscreditor anonymityfortheirwork.Abreedercanspecifyiftheywant their name associated with a cultivar or not.

PortingtheCreativeCommonsShareAlikeattributetoCannabis Breeders’Rightsraisesinterestingquestionsaboutpropagation Whathappenswhentwocultivarsareinvolved,eachwith different CBR propagation rights specified?

Forexample,Aliceislicensed

CBR:
N-C-C(nopropagation allowed)andBobis

CBR:
B-F-A(breedingallowed).Theonly fairresolutionistodefertothemorerestrictivepropagation rights (those towards the top of the following table).Whenallofthecultivation,commerce,andcreditpermutations areassembledthereare22possiblecombinationsincludinga customcommerciallicense.There’snoreasontissueculture, pollen and other genetic material can’t have CBR designations.ThecurrentversionoftheCannabisBreeder’sRights(version 2.027jan19)takesmorescenariosintoaccountthatprevious versions.It’sLeBlancCNE’swishthatthosedistributing geneticsuseCannabisBreeder’sRightsdesignations.It’sfree andmaycomeinhandyatsomepointinthefuture.Whilethere isnoenforcementorpenaltycomponentthatwasneverthe intention.CBRisastandardizedwayforbreeder’stoprotect theirhardwork.

ZuluTime
wasreleasedundertwoCannabis Breeder’sRightsdesignations,onecommercial(
CBR:
L)and one free (
CBR:
P-F-C). [www.LeBlancCNE.com/Zulu-Time ]ItismysincerehopethatCannabisBreeder’sRightsembodies DJShort’soriginalintentionsandaddressestheconcernsofall hemp and cannabis breeders and growers. Thanks pal.

Jerry Whiting
27jan19
All power to the people! Om mani padme hum.