Cannabis, DNA sequencing, and Utility Patents: Danger!

Having seen the effects of patented seeds on food crops, how these patents force farmers to buy and propogate patented seed, and how much damage these patents have had on the security of humanity's food crops, I am very concerned the same is about to happen to cannabis.

Read this and note the reference of Mowgli Holmes: https://www.gq.com/story/the-great-pot-monopoly-mystery

Now read this and note the same name, Mowgli Holmes: https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=296541

Also note the many other names, businesses, and institutions involved.

If I were any of the people that sent seeds to Sam the Skunkman and/or the other people/companies in those articles, I would be very concermed that you just helped them dna sequence and patent as many cannabis landraces as possible so that they may patent them once cannabis is fully legalized in the US.

These are not unfounded fears. Sam's number one reason that they could never ever patent the strains is that the seeds "could not be legally cultivated in the US, the seeds would be sterilized, therefore patents could never be applied for". Well, guess what, cannabis can now be legally cultivated and oh what a coincidence guess what is about to be patented! I highly doubt those seeds were sterilized.

I hope you all read this and that it is not too late to stop the theft of our medecine, recreation, and hertitage that is Cannabis.

I fully expect this to be deleted, however the truth must be put out there so the threads may be unraveled. This is an industry worth trillions of dollars and it is sad that so many of cannabis' early pioneers are now selling out and selling our free plant down the river to the highest bidder so that only they may benefit.

You can't patent landraces, or pre existing strains.
Pretty sure that you can only get a patent on a plant if it can be shown to be a new breed that doesn't already exist, and show that you bred it.

there's probably someone here who knows more about patent law who could chime in

In fact, from the horses mouth:

https://www.uspto.gov/patents-getti...ications/general-information-about-35-usc-161


What is a plant patent?

A plant patent is granted by the Government to an inventor (or the inventor's heirs or assigns) who has invented or discovered and asexually reproduced a distinct and new variety of plant, other than a tuber propagated plant or a plant found in an uncultivated state. The grant, which lasts for 20 years from the date of filing the application, protects the inventor's right to exclude others from asexually reproducing, selling, or using the plant so reproduced. This protection is limited to a plant in its ordinary meaning:
A living plant organism which expresses a set of characteristics determined by its single, genetic makeup or genotype, which can be duplicated through asexual reproduction, but which can not otherwise be "made" or "manufactured."
Sports, mutants, hybrids, and transformed plants are comprehended; sports or mutants may be spontaneous or induced. Hybrids may be natural, from a planned breeding program, or somatic in source. While natural plant mutants might have naturally occurred, they must have been discovered in a cultivated area.
Algae and macro fungi are regarded as plants, but bacteria are not.
The information presented in this publication is tailored to apply to and is limited to patents on asexually reproduced plants. While the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) does accept utility applications having claims to plants, seed, genes, etc., such practice is beyond the scope of this publication. General information regarding utility practice can be obtained by calling PTO Information Services Division at 1-800-786-9199, or from a registered patent attorney. Intellectual property protection for true breeding seed reproduced plant varieties is offered through the Plant Variety Protection Office, Beltsville, Md., which should be contacted for information regarding intellectual property protection for such crops.
Provisions and Limitations
Patents to plants which are stable and reproduced by asexual reproduction, and not a potato or other edible tuber reproduced plant, are provided for by Title 35 United States Code, Section 161 which states:
Whoever invents or discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct and new variety of plant, including cultivated sports, mutants, hybrids, and newly found seedlings, other than a tuber propagated plant or a plant found in an uncultivated state, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of title. (Amended September 3, 1954, 68 Stat. 1190).
The provisions of this title relating to patents for inventions shall apply to patents for plants, except as otherwise provided.
As noted in the last paragraph of the statute, the plant patent must also satisfy the general requirements of patentability. The subject matter of the application would be a plant which developed or discovered by applicant, and which has been found stable by asexual reproduction. To be patentable, it would also be required:
That the plant was invented or discovered and, if discovered, that the discovery was made in a cultivated area.
That the plant is not a plant which is excluded by statute, where the part of the plant used for asexual reproduction is not a tuber food part, as with potato or Jerusalem artichoke.
That the person or persons filing the application are those who actually invented the claimed plant; i.e., discovered or developed and identified or isolated the plant, and asexually reproduced the plant.
That the plant has not been sold or released in the United States of America more than one year prior to the date of the application.
That the plant has not been enabled to the public, i.e., by description in a printed publication in this country more than one year before the application for patent with an offer to sale; or by release or sale of the plant more than one year prior to application for patent.
That the plant be shown to differ from known, related plants by at least one distinguishing characteristic, which is more than a difference caused by growing conditions or fertility levels, etc.
The invention would not have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of invention by applicant.
Where doubt exists as to the patentability of a specific plant, a qualified legal authority should be consulted prior to applying to assure that the plant satisfies statutory requirements and is not exempted from plant patent protection.

You have to prove that your strain has unique characteristics otherwise not found anywhere else in the world. It can't be distributed to anyone else before the patent is granted (ie. Josey Whales can't go and patent gorilla glue). It'll be difficult to patent a new, select hybrid since most commercially viable varieties share the same parent plants many generations back, but if someone genetically engineers or breeds a plant proven to have disease resistance to pathogens under very rainy, cold weather and still produce big, dense nugs(for example), that's a different story.

The spirit of a plant patent law is to drive innovation and reward/protect the inventor.

Yeah, I have enough genetics to keep me busy for years. They can patent all the shit they want. As long as there are people like me, and there are many, this patent business doesn't mean jack shit.

Hold up guys, it has to be real, one post and registered here just to post this, it has to be the truth.

And that post took 7 months to write...