Plant patents, trademarks, and PBR: Let’s discuss facts (part 1)

Me as well

Patent already secured...

Patent already secured...

Interesting topic.

JeanGreens said:

Ok...my 2 cents.

Currently I am working with a lobbiest to write legislation to require that all clones that are sold in retail be required to have plant paperwork that is given to the wholesaler, to the retailer to the public. This paperwork would guarantee the name of the strain that is sold is the correct genetic strain through genetic testing.

This would be the same sort of testing done for flowers of any kind. In order for an American Beauty rose to be sold as an American Beauty, it has to be certified. Do the same for MMJ or rec MJ

The one who grew the original mother is in control of who owns the rights to that plant. As cuts are made, registered plants get certificates that go with their clones so that genetics are verified.
The second a person from the public buys a clone you loose control.

By doing this, we can now insure that what is sold retail is actually the plant it porports to be. IE, if you being told you are buying Maui Wowie, then genetic paperwork of the plant certificate is the proof that it IS Maui Wowie.

The controller of who gets those certificates are the plant breeders, or those that have the original mother plant.

Click to expand...

What state? Sounds like you're referring to recreational, yet in all states but CO(?) sales of clones to the public isn't allowed. Medical is a different story, but in many states it's not allowed to sell clones to the general public.

Who would pay for this testing? And at what points do you think testing should occur? For example, just at the clone producer, or breeder? Or at the retailer as well?

This doesn't sound feasible at this time, and it sounds like lots of law suits will happen from people claiming to the 'original breeder.' I think the only way this can work is with new hybrids or crosses, not anything existing in the public at this time. Though maybe I don't understand the whole system you propose.

I don't see any good reason why a breeder would sell certifiable stock to the general public, because it's not going to generate near as much income as selling only to growers under contract, and the person buying the clone (public) is going to grow mothers and share with their buddies, and then it will get shared with others, and others. So from the position of a breeder I see no good insensitive to sell to the general public, unless one is selling clones that are not unique and are already in the public (like the business model of Dark Heart Nursery, and other like companies).

Ya...its funny people do things like this:

http://www.google.com/patents/US20140259228


...and yet it is of almost 0 legal benefit till the Feds deschedule cannabis.

Beta Test Team said:

There does seem to be some question as to whether the USPTO will grant a patent for a Cannabis plant. For example:

- The official USPTO stance I got today from the USPTO "office of patent legal administration" is that they will grant patents for drug Cannabis plants.

- An IP/patent attorney who works with the Cannabis industry on these issues said on Wednesday (https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=299138) that the USPTO won't grant patents for Cannabis plants. She also said federal trademark protection for the cultivar's name isn't possible either, at this time.

- Chimera wrote about an article he read where an attorney said the USPTO seem to be treating Cannabis plant patents like any other patent (no source provided).

- Sam wrote patents will not be grated (no source provided).


I think maybe what the USPTO will do on paper, and what happens in real life may not be exactly the same. It will be interesting to see if those three different chemotype cultivars linked to above (from Israel) get granted patents.

Soon we'll find out the ruling for the federal case that may end up being prompting re-scheduling for Cannabis, it's due to end on Feb. 11th: https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=295664

Click to expand...

Jericho Mile said:

progressing cock magic....melt down eminent

Click to expand...

Countdown........10, 9, 8, 7, .........

This countdown has been going on for months, sure is slow counting

I have a pile of USPTO stuff sitting right by me, it's been here all winter collecting dust.

Check your local area for seminars they put on. I was working the day of the seminar, but had a bunch of literature brought back to me. It's free, and they'll answer questions the best they can.

yhatzee clock (sp?) or whoever should have should have hired a professional attorney to draft that abstract, because the language snippet makes it look pretty much legally worthless.

Heusinomics said:

I would actually like to thank beta for helpin to bring this issue to the forums..
It would b a terable shame for big biz/gov to sneak these restrictions by us w/o taking the "community " into the discussion. (His attitude is an embarrassment tho)!

Click to expand...

Money talks, bullshit walks. Money and power is not discussing anything with the community, only the community liason's they hire on payroll or string along.

I've seen it a bunch of times before. This won't be much different, other than the enormity of money involved.

Can you PM me or contact me about your work with ABC?
-SamS

hyb.0 said:

Interesting turn of events, no?

Click to expand...

socioecologist said:

It is not. I'm not sure which one Sam mentioned; the only other project I know of with any real steam is being run by Phylos Bioscience in Portland. That's Mowgli Holmes' company--they are mapping the cannabis "family tree". It's a really, really cool project...but, when I spoke with him in September, he indicated that they were not interested in sharing the gene sequencing data with anyone.

Our group of scientists at OSU have a strong predilection towards keeping the public "public", for everyone's collective benefit.

Click to expand...

You mean like how osu kept their microwave essential oil machine "public"?? No they placed a patent on it and sell it for profit just like they will do with other things they discover. They may share data but osu is all about the money grab just like most. Remember osu is a state run school. The state and school own what they discover.


http://www.google.com/patents/US20130240347