[LINK] The Main Problem With GM Food Is The Patent, Not The GM

[Janet Hawtin]

On 8 January 2013 08:08, Kim Holburn <kim at holburn.net> wrote:
> http://www.slate.com/articles/life/food/2012/12/plant_patent_law_why_overhauling_it_will_do_more_to_help_the_food_movement.single.html

<rant>
Apologies this is a broad rant on a range of issues. Likely a TLDR target =)

imho I think the same problems of 'entitlement' by big business as an
obstacle for communities and innovation in technology and arts.
Both in copyright and in patents and especially if the perennial push
at WIPO for broadcasters to have their own overriding rights separate
from any connection to creative responsibility.(The pipes owners own
the content transmitted)

I also think that the current approach to GM agriculture is
unscientific because there is no disclosure of what has been changed
so that any impacts can be recognised and there is no 'control' space
where the parent species is guaranteed to be safe if something turns
out to be problematic. Lots of people seem to be less able to tolerate
wheat breads and I wonder if something has changed but how would we
know? It seems to be a space where there are a lot of rights for
companies like Monsanto and no responsibilities. In the USA this seems
to be because there is a free flowing cross pollenation between
Monsanto management and government supervision of GM.
One of the youtube videos on Monsanto:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VEZYQF9WlE

Quarantine should be the responsibility of the GM producer and there
need to be penalties for breeches so that it is real for them.
ie treat organic crops as the safe default and have controls for other
approaches which have related ecological risks.
It should not be legal for a company to ban farmers from growing from
their own harvesting of seed for the next season even if it is GM.
(Indian farmer suicides
http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-gmo-seeds-farmer-suicides-every-30-minutes/)

Perhaps there should be a commitment to and branding for crops which
are 'open standards' in the same way that document formats and
technologies offer advantages to people working with them, even if
there is a graduation between heritage varieties, hybrid varieties and
GM at least flagging which is what makes it possible to see if there
are issues with any.

Would it be reasonable to brand the proportion of vegetable fruit meat
prices goes to the farmer and what is retail so people could shop for
products which are domestically Fair Trade? Or perhaps we need to ask
for Fair Trade domestically? Would be nice to have a way of seeing
which Australian Made products are returning enough to farmers.

Agree that patents on health have to cause an unacceptable tension
between ideas of property and functions of health practice in society.
If the control of invention is not the crux of business then business
will find other means of earning. Information feudalism along with
companies changing national law(TPP) to block nations from protecting
their local interests are two shifts of power which need more than
occupy to unpack.

I worry that the historical record(and current process) of changes in
policy and negotiations including trade agreements is not transparent.
The commitments our government makes are opaque and so we do not know
what we are losing. Suddenly there are proposals for mining around the
Barrier Reef, Tasmanian Forests, Kangaroo Island. What has changed,
what have we conceded to make this possible? Libraries could keep
Australian digital record but they need to be retooled/reskilled with
cloud scale hosting so that they can collect digital assets
effectively. Media do not cover this kind of material in a
comprehensive and thorough way. Perhaps people would not watch. Would
people vote their perspectives on these issues as much as they would
for BigBrother?

Universities in Canada are losing engineering and social
science/humanities courses in favour of medical and legal courses
because they have adopted the same approach we are taking where the
student choice determines the possible scope of programs. This means
nationally we will not have a mix of offerings with a relationship to
'skill security'?. Combined with transient cultural record and the
defunding of student politics as a forum for learning democratic
process it feels as though nationally it will be difficult to sustain
critical thought about national governance if the data infrastructure,
skills and fora for discussion are lost.

</rant>