• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    208 months ago

    There is a huge difference between not being allowed to do something, and deciding not to do something.

    I don’t have a car (like most people in my town). So not allowing car ownership would be ok?

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -28 months ago

      Ah, I thought this one was pretty obvious, but let me add point 3

      3: every single modern cultivar sold the past half century has had intellectual property agreement attached to it. You’re not allowed to save modern non-gmo seeds either.

      • @Cort
        link
        English
        138 months ago

        Them:

        A big problem is that farmers are not allowed to use the corn and and grain which they grew themselves on their own field as seeds.

        You:

        There is so much wrong with this claim . . . intellectual property agreement attached to it. You’re not allowed to save modern non-gmo seeds

        • Tar_Alcaran
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Them, replying to a post about GMO-seeds: “you’re not allowed to save these seeds”

          Me: “That’s not a GMO thing, you’re not allowed to save any seeds”.

          Also, I don’t think that’s a good thing at all. Most IP law is detrimental.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        it was not obvious to me. I am still in doubt thought.

        is there a source?

        (I am especially sceptical about the quanifiers. “every sjngle,” is a very strong statement. “You’re not allowed to save modern non-gmo seeds either.” implies, that there are no non-gmo seeds, that the farmer could sell, which is also a strong statement)

        • Tar_Alcaran
          link
          fedilink
          English
          48 months ago

          Source down there.

          “You’re not allowed to save modern non-gmo seeds either.” implies, that there are no non-gmo seeds, that the farmer could sell, which is also a strong statement

          No, there definitely are, but most aren’t modern. You’re allowed to do whatever you want with seeds that aren’t covered under IP laws, like heirloom seeds. The problem is that those (by definition) aren’t the latest and greatest, so their yields will be lower, they’ll be less hardy, etc.

          I’m sure there will also be open varieties, but the problem is still that seed saving is difficult and costly, so most farmers will buy seeds. And the people selling those seeds get less money from selling the old seeds. And that’s bad, but not a GMO-only thing.

          Here’s a great guide as to why the whole situation is rather shit (imho, and in their less-humble opinion too): https://seedalliance.org/publications/a-guide-to-seed-intellectual-property-rights/