Justices hostile to farmer's argument against Monsanto

Comments (1)

The justices probably aren’t the best choice to determine the outcome of this case. Obviously, Monsanto is doing its best to collect as much money as possible in every way possible. The issue is this: Monsanto sells a tremendous volume of Roundup to farmers. Roundup is pretty much indiscriminate. It kills weeds and crops equally well. That’s a problem as farmers who control their weeds with it also mal-affect their crops. So Monsanto produces a Roundup resistant seed. Sounds fair right? Not in my estimation. I look at it like this:

Someone sells you a soda. Upon drinking it, they announce that it contains a poison, but they’d be quite happy to sell you the antidote now. Monsanto should be obliged to supply the seed without restriction if they want to continue selling Roundup. They make plenty on the poison to offset the seed costs.

However, my feeling is that farmers would do better to join together and boycott Monsanto altogether. In one year’s growing period, Monsanto would see the light and back off.

Feb 19, 2013 9:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.