Monsanto Shifts ALL Liability to Farmers

[dannonamous]

everyone's favorite corporation is at it again...

Farmers who plant Monsanto's GM crops probably don't realize what they bargain for when they sign the Monsanto Technology Stewardship Agreement contract. One farmer reportedly 'went crazy' when he discovered the scope of the contract because it transfers ALL liability to the farmer or grower. Here is the paragraph that defines Monsanto's limit of liability that shifts it to the farmer:

"GROWER'S EXCLUSIVE LIMITED REMEDY: THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY OF THE GROWER AND THE LIMIT OF THE LIABILITY OF MONSANTO OR ANY SELLER FOR ANY AND ALL LOSSES, INJURY OR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE USE OR HANDLING OF SEED (INCLUDING CLAIMS BASED IN CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, PRODUCT LIABILITY, STRICT LIABILITY, TORT, OR OTHERWISE) SHALL BE THE PRICE PAID BY THE GROWER FOR THE QUANTITY OF THE SEED INVOLVED OR, AT THE ELECTION OF MONSANTO OR THE SEED SELLER, THE REPLACEMENT OF THE SEED. IN NO EVENT SHALL MONSANTO OR ANY SELLER BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, SPECIAL, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES."
​

G. Edward Griffin, author of 'The Creature From Jekyll Island', and numerous other books and documentary films, and Anthony Patchett, retired assistant Head Deputy District Attorney, Los Angeles County Environmental Crimes/ OSHA Division explain the consequences of the Monsanto contract in the video below.
Monsanto's Technology Stewardship Agreement shifts responsibility to growers for any and all losses, injury or damages resulting from the use of Monsanto seeds. There is no expiration date on the contract. The grower may terminate the contract, but: "Grower's responsibilities and the other terms herein shall survive..."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWak_bUHDm8

Around 5:00 in the video, he's talking about how monsanto knows there are going to be lawsuits and other problems associated with using their crap, and it's plain as day that they're pinning it all on the prospective victims.

He makes a great point in that we'll probably never be able to stop them using the legal system, because they practically own it or are part of organizations that do, and that monsanto's whole scheme rests on the farmers to actually do their work for them.

So if there's anyone that could stop monsanto and other gmo fucks, it's the farmers. So if you know a farmer, send them a copy of the [URL="http://www.westernfarmservice.com/pdf/Corn/2009MTSA.pdf"]Monsanto Technology Stewardship Agreement[/URL]

 

[guest456mpy]

Most independent growers already know about Monsanto and GM seeds. We've been battling them for decades. It's the AgroCorp farms owned by big corporations like General Mills and their counterparts that do the bulk of the Monsanto planting. Many of these farms grow near interdependent farms and then our crops get inter pollinated. The net result is get get the Monsanto genes whether we want them or not.

But, no harm in spreading their latest move in the continuing battle for genetics and the ultimate control of the food chain.

 

[dragongrower]

when people get to the food counter in the supermarket, they always pick the cheaper product..
That is the reason why companies like monsanto have such power..

what i mean is, would people just buy local organich products instead of cheap food that comes 1000 of km' away, it would all be much better..

it would also help if the big companies startet not to think in $$$ only..

 

[HighDesertJoe]

I haven't the words to express my disappointment and rage over Monsanto

 

[ixnay007]

Everyone does this, have a look at your software eula..

As long as americans are sue happy, corps will pass as much responsibility as will stick to someone lower down the chain.

As for the actual contract being valid (you can sign an agreement for pretty much anything, but that doesn't mean you're actually obligated to do things which are illegal or wouldn't actually be considered valid in the scope of the contract)..

I'd say there's a fair possibility that a court case could get that thrown out.. I'm not a lawyer though.

 

[bombadil.360]

you can nail monsanto for whatever, all you need is lots of money for good lawyers and excellent determination.

where are the heros?

 

[Clackamas Coot]

where are the heros?

Stepping over the homeless sleeping on the street in order to get into the jewelry store to have their Rolex cleaned?

CC

 

[BadTicket]

when people get to the food counter in the supermarket, they always pick the cheaper product..
That is the reason why companies like monsanto have such power..

what i mean is, would people just buy local organich products instead of cheap food that comes 1000 of km' away, it would all be much better..

it would also help if the big companies startet not to think in $$$ only..

i don't do that, i try to buy & support locally produced organic shits. Most of the big company/farm stuff is nasty tasting crap anyhow, i'd rather eat good than save a few bucks, but to each his own..

 

[Deft]

Its really bad that we gave them the right to patent plants.

 

[genkisan]

The entire executive board of Monsanto should be given huge doses of datura and then be vigorously arse-plowed by a troupe of trained gorillas until their bowels fill to bursting with congealed monkey semen.........









on TV......














until they die.

 

[pearlemae]

Monsanto is doing the same thing all the large corps and banks are doing SCREWING PEOPLE ANYTHING FOR THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR/EURO DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU LIVE.

 

[dragongrower]

i don't do that, i try to buy & support locally produced organic shits. Most of the big company/farm stuff is nasty tasting crap anyhow, i'd rather eat good than save a few bucks, but to each his own..

yes. That is what I said..

 

[mean mr.mustard]

They just hate it when people sue them.

They do love suing farmers though.

 

[decarboxylator]

In this case, I support a strike first policy. Go California!

When the words 'Monsanto Company' and 'lawsuit' converge in a news story, you can expect to hear about the biotechnology/chemical giant pursuing a patent infringement case against a farmer. Now, the tables have turned.

The Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT), on behalf of 60 family farmers, seed businesses and organic agricultural organizations (several of whom represent California-based interests), have filed suit against Monsanto to protect themselves from liability if their crops are contaminated by genetically modified seeds. Plaintiffs are seeking a ruling that would bar Monsanto from suing if plants from Roundup Ready seeds cross pollinate with non-patented, conventional and organic crops.

Judge Naomi Buchwald of the federal district court in Manhattan will be hearing the case titled Organic Seed Growers & Trade Association, et al v. Monsanto. According to PUBPAT's official press release:

“The organic plaintiffs were forced to sue preemptively to protect themselves from being accused of patent infringement should they ever become contaminated by Monsanto's genetically modified seed, something Monsanto has done to others in the past.”

The plaintiff organizations represent over 270,000 members including thousands of organic certified family farmers who feel increasingly threatened by GMO seed contamination by wind-blown pollen or other means.

“This case asks whether Monsanto has the right to sue organic farmers for patent infringement if Monsanto's transgenic seed should land on their property,” said Dan Ravicher, PUBPAT's Executive Director, Lecturer of Law at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York, and plaintiffs' lead attorney in the case. “It seems quite perverse that an organic farmer contaminated by transgenic seed could be accused of patent infringement, but Monsanto has made such accusations before and is notorious for having sued hundreds of farmers for patent infringement, so we had to act to protect the interests of our clients.”

To justify their case, plaintiffs are challenging the validity of Monsanto's patents. According to Ravicher, GMOs fail to meet the “usefulness” requirement of patent law. In its March 29th opening filing, PUBPAT provided evidence that GMO seed has a negative impact on human health and the economy. Plaintiffs also allege that the supposed benefits of GMOs have been falsely advertised. According to the filing, Monsanto's claims that their product increases production and decreases herbicide use are simply not true.

“Some say transgenic seed can coexist with organic seed, but history tells us that's not possible, and it's actually in Monsanto's financial interest to eliminate organic seed so that they can have a total monopoly over our food supply,” said Ravicher. “Monsanto is the same chemical company that previously brought us Agent Orange, DDT, PCB's and other toxins, which they said were safe, but we know are not. Now Monsanto says transgenic seed is safe, but evidence clearly shows it is not.”

Several statements made by farmers involved in the case draw from the principles of Natural Law. Rose Marie Burroughs of California Cloverleaf Farms was one of them:

“The devastation caused by GMO contamination is an ecological catastrophe to our world equal to the fall out of nuclear radiation. Nature, farming and health are all being affected by GMO contamination. We must protect our world by protecting our most precious, sacred resource of seed sovereignty. People must have the right to the resources of the earth for our sustenance. We must have the freedom to farm that causes no harm to the environment or to other people. We must protect the environment, farmers livelihood, public health and people’s right to non GMO food contamination.”

Mark Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst for The Cornucopia Institute sums up the intentions of the plaintiffs:

“Family-scale farmers desperately need the judiciary branch of our government to balance the power Monsanto is able to wield in the marketplace and in the courts. Monsanto, and the biotechnology industry, have made great investments in our executive and legislative branches through campaign contributions and powerful lobbyists in Washington. We need the court system to offset this power and protect individual farmers from corporate tyranny. Farmers have saved seeds since the beginning of agriculture by our species. It is outrageous that one corporate entity, through the trespass of what they refer to as their 'technology,' can intimidate and run roughshod over family farmers in this country. It should be the responsibility of Monsanto, and farmers licensing their technology, to ensure that genetically engineered DNA does not trespass onto neighboring farmland. It is outrageous, that through no fault of their own, farmers are being intimidated into not saving seed for fear that they will be doggedly pursued through the court system and potentially bankrupted.”

To see PUBPAT's official press release which contains more compelling statements made by organic organization leaders and a full plaintiff list for the case, visit this link.

http://caivn.org/article/2011/04/16/organic-farmers-sue-monsanto-over-seed-patenting

 

[supermanlives]

cant we have them declared terrorists yet. they are doing more long term damage than any terrorist to date

 

[kmk420kali]

It sounds like a Standard Disclaimer to me--

 

[dragongrower]

nice. I hope they win!

 

[SOTF420]

Monstersanto is the anti-christ. Down with Monsanto.

 

[ImaginaryFriend]

The Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT), on behalf of 60 family farmers, seed businesses and organic agricultural organizations (several of whom represent California-based interests), have filed suit against Monsanto to protect themselves from liability if their crops are contaminated by genetically modified seeds. Plaintiffs are seeking a ruling that would bar Monsanto from suing if plants from Roundup Ready seeds cross pollinate with non-patented, conventional and organic crops.

How far away from this is suing Monsanto for damages for cross-pollination of heritage strains and damaging the farmer's produce (genetic integrity/international value/something less cryptic and more concrete)?

Insofar as Monsanto is deliberately modifying and producing genetics that have chemical management plans, any cross-pollination to conventional crops can be argued as damaging insofar as they may not be able to be cultivated in a conventional manner. The claim would not be based on intellectual property, but on trespass and damages of real goods.

If I put a piece of my intellectual property through your window, I've still broken your window.

Of course, litigation is mad expensive.

Maybe some sharp idealist right out of law school can get conned into some free work to build a reputation while saving the world.

 

[ixnay007]

The entire executive board of Monsanto should be given huge doses of datura and then be vigorously arse-plowed by a troupe of trained gorillas until their bowels fill to bursting with congealed monkey semen.........









on TV......














until they die.

Gorillas, being monogamous by nature actually have some of the smallest penises in primates, the ones with larger penises are ones where females are likely to mate with multiple males, so being able to put your sperm closer to the egg gives you an advantage in passing your genes onto the next generation.

So, bonobos, humans, and chimpanzees (to name a few) not being particularly monogamous by nature, tend to have larger penises in respect to their body size.