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

[Gry]

In fact is this is one very odd thread.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Beta, could you elaborate on what Alice said? Although, as evidenced by the fed’s patent of cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants, it is possible to patent processes that are not currently federally legal without intrinsically breaking federal law.
It is funny that you mention Alice potentially confusing hemp and drug type cannabis; ironically the only drug type cultivars that have been granted PBRs are lumped in with hemp.

She didn't say much more than I posted, except that anything that contains Cannabis extracts (like balms, creams, etc.) are also able to be patented (although, I didn't inquire if she was referring to THC-free products, but it didn't seem that way to me.)

Is there something specific you were thinking about? If so, maybe I can add some more context.

In terms of your PBR comment about cultivars, are you referring to UPOV Convention?

 

[Jericho Mile]

cock magic

 

[whiteberrieS]

Good reading in here. I'll be back when I feel like turning my brain on...

OPINION: Patent on your personal makes you an asshole

 

[socioecologist]

Holy christ, that devolved quickly. I hope Chimera and Sam stick around for this one--your insights are needed and respected. One of the foundational issues moving forward with cannabis IP is establishing a unique cultivar; to establish a unique cultivar, you need to have a baseline to compare it to. In other words, how do you demonstrate that you hold something novel?

The first step in making that possible, I think, is through sequencing "publicly available" varieties (Sour Diesel, etc.) so breeders have a comparative baseline to operate from. Anyone doing that in a public way? I know of several companies who are doing this privately, but they are reticent to share their genomic data.

I'm working with some of my students to make this a reality here in Oregon. We have a bevy of genomics researchers (and world-class non-cannabis plant breeders) who are chomping at the bit, and a enough growers with encompassing libraries of public varieties to contribute that we could make this a reality very quickly. More importantly, we are committed to an open-source approach--any sequence data obtained from publicly available varieties will be available to anyone who wants it.

I would encourage those who are interested to contact me personally: [email protected]

Our fundraising effort for basic DNA extraction is underway. We don't need much to make this happen. Any money we collect over our goal will be used to subsidize genome sequencing costs.

 

[plastochron]

She didn't say much more than I posted, except that anything that contains Cannabis extracts (like balms, creams, etc.) are also able to be patented (although, I didn't inquire if she was referring to THC-free products, but it didn't seem that way to me.)

Is there something specific you were thinking about? If so, maybe I can add some more context.

In terms of your PBR comment about cultivars, are you referring to UPOV Convention?

The funny thing about patents is they are basically worthless if you cannot enforce them. Patents and PVPs are granted and enforced through the federal entities. Cannabis is federally illegal, making cannabis patent enforcement completely unprecedented.

PBRs (plant breeder's rights) and PVPs (plant variety protections) reference protections provided through national plant genetic protections outlined by UPOV, such as the US's certificates of PVP.

Holy christ, that devolved quickly. I hope Chimera and Sam stick around for this one--your insights are needed and respected. One of the foundational issues moving forward with cannabis IP is establishing a unique cultivar; to establish a unique cultivar, you need to have a baseline to compare it to. In other words, how do you demonstrate that you hold something novel?

The first step in making that possible, I think, is through sequencing "publicly available" varieties (Sour Diesel, etc.) so breeders have a comparative baseline to operate from. Anyone doing that in a public way? I know of several companies who are doing this privately, but they are reticent to share their genomic data.

I'm working with some of my students to make this a reality here in Oregon. We have a bevy of genomics researchers (and world-class non-cannabis plant breeders) who are chomping at the bit, and a enough growers with encompassing libraries of public varieties to contribute that we could make this a reality very quickly. More importantly, we are committed to an open-source approach--any sequence data obtained from publicly available varieties will be available to anyone who wants it.

I would encourage those who are interested to contact me personally: [email protected]

Our fundraising effort for basic DNA extraction is underway. We don't need much to make this happen. Any money we collect over our goal will be used to subsidize genome sequencing costs.

Totally agree with you regarding Chimera and Sam.

I think you are correct regarding the establishment of what cultivars are already in the public domain. I disagree though that individual 'prior art' cultivars will be only defined based on genomes... historically and currently plant patents and PVPC are based on phenotypic traits not genomes. Genomic and molecular tools are used more for enforcement of these IP protections than necessarily defining an individual cultivar. I know that sequencing adds an additional level of protection but that is not the standard, baseline mechanism for determining individual cultivar status. We can expect that as the smoke clears and the process for gaining genetic IP protection for cannabis becomes better established that people will come out of the fucking woodwork trying to swoop on PVPs and such; it seems likely that precedents will be established specifically to resolve disputes when 100 different parties try to claim rights for OG kush... genomic and molecular tools are the best tool available (although not cheap). But is it really reasonable to expect that every asexually propagated lineage in existence (or at least available to the general public) is going to be sequenced to establish the public domain? Only time will tell.

 

[harry74]

It never ceases to amaze me how charlatans with zero originality or integrity are able to dupe the gullible masses into a totally hype-induced marketing ploy. Where the greedy and unprincipled prey upon the uninformed, the Noble Warriors will choose to attempt to enlighten.

It begs to be stated that those who so lack originality and integrity are really quite, lame.

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?threadid=96963

I couldn´t say it better.

 

[MJPassion]

OPINION: Patent on your personal makes you an asshole

Generally, I agree. However, If more "individuals" were to be granted plant protection there is more of a chance of having those particular plants available publicly. If for no other reason than, that the holder of protected plants has the Right to remove any commercial gain from selling that genome.
When I mention the above... 2 very specific plants/cuts come to mind... The very popular GG4 & FREE FOR ALL.
I believe these two plants were to be distributed FREELY, without commercial gain. However, because we are dealing with a quasi legal market, those that can make a buck by hoarding these and selling cuts are free to do so.

Holy christ, that devolved quickly. I hope Chimera and Sam stick around for this one--your insights are needed and respected. One of the foundational issues moving forward with cannabis IP is establishing a unique cultivar; to establish a unique cultivar, you need to have a baseline to compare it to. In other words, how do you demonstrate that you hold something novel?

The first step in making that possible, I think, is through sequencing "publicly available" varieties (Sour Diesel, etc.) so breeders have a comparative baseline to operate from. Anyone doing that in a public way? I know of several companies who are doing this privately, but they are reticent to share their genomic data.

I'm working with some of my students to make this a reality here in Oregon. We have a bevy of genomics researchers (and world-class non-cannabis plant breeders) who are chomping at the bit, and a enough growers with encompassing libraries of public varieties to contribute that we could make this a reality very quickly. More importantly, we are committed to an open-source approach--any sequence data obtained from publicly available varieties will be available to anyone who wants it.

I would encourage those who are interested to contact me personally: [email protected]

Our fundraising effort for basic DNA extraction is underway. We don't need much to make this happen. Any money we collect over our goal will be used to subsidize genome sequencing costs.

Is this related to the gene sequencing project as mentioned, in another thread, by Sam?

 

[MJPassion]

Can anybody answer this...

What are the monetary inputs required to be granted a patent or PVP status within the US.

Plant Patents, in general, are illogical!
Seeds & plants don't understand human languages.
Therefore, they don't give two shits what any written law says.
Scatter them protected seeds... see if they care about what's written.

 

[socioecologist]

Is this related to the gene sequencing project as mentioned, in another thread, by Sam?

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.

 

[Beta Test Team]

This thread is getting off topic. If people want to post about patents and how they feel about them, please start your own thread.

This thread is to discuss patents, trademarks, and PVP certificate, US based. This thread is not for discussing how to get a patent, or if patents should be granted, it's just to discuss what is provided in terms of protections and the bird's eye view of the situation.

Feel free to start your own threads for topics you wish to discuss.

This thread is meant to collect facts, not unsubstantiated opinions -- regardless of who's unsubstantiated opinion it is. I really don't care who's name is attached to an opinion, it's still just an opinion.

socioecologist: I very much welcome your comments (hopefully backed up with source material) on the thread topic. And thanks for stopping in, I'm always happy to meet a fellow scientist.

However, that said, I think this thread is the wrong place for you to post about your GoFundMe project, etc. Please start your own thread for your topic. While I applaud you for what you're doing, this thread isn't the right place to promote your project.

By the way, Phylos is the company Sam is working with, but the fact it's not open source research is pretty much a verboten topic here.

In fact most of the info will be shared, if the truth is important?-SamS

MJPassion: Kindly stop posting my thread, please. You're driving it off topic and besides, you hate me and I am not fond of you at all, so please, go post in a different thread, or start your own on this topic where you can post about whatever you like.

Thanks everyone for understanding, and for starting your own thread.

 

[Beta Test Team]

The funny thing about patents is they are basically worthless if you cannot enforce them. Patents and PVPs are granted and enforced through the federal entities. Cannabis is federally illegal, making cannabis patent enforcement completely unprecedented.

Yup, which is what makes this topic very interesting, and why I don't take someone's (regardless of who's it is) unsubstantiated opinion as fact, because we're in uncharted waters here.

 

[MJPassion]

This thread is getting off topic. If people want to post about patents and how they feel about them, please start your own thread.

This thread is to discuss patents, trademarks, and PVP certificate, US based (this thread isn't for UPOV Convention, for example). This thread is not for discussing how to get a patent, or if patents should be granted, it's just to discuss what is provided in terms of protections and the bird's eye view of the situation.

Feel free to start your own threads for topics you wish to discuss.

This thread is meant to collect facts, not unsubstantiated opinions -- regardless of who's unsubstantiated opinion it is. I really don't care who's name is attached to an opinion, it's still just an opinion.

socioecologist: I very much welcome your comments (hopefully backed up with source material) on the thread topic. Thanks for stopping in, I'm always happy to meet a fellow scientist.

However, that said, I think this thread is the wrong place for you to post about your GoFundMe project, etc. Please start your own thread for your topic (it's pretty rude, and spammy of you to post what you did in this thread). While I applaud you for what you're doing (assuming you're above the board), this thread isn't the right place to promote your project.

By the way, Phylos is the company Sam is working with, but don't bring up that it's not open source research or you'll get Sam mad. That was my point about Phylos in Sam's original thread on the topic, that it's not open source research, and I got my posts deleted and warned not to post that fact again.

MJPassion: Kindly stop posting my thread, please. You're driving it off topic and besides, you hate me and I am not fond out you at all, so please, go post in a different thread, or start your own on this topic where you can post about whatever you like.

Thanks everyone for understanding, and for starting your own thread.

Hmmmmm...

Last time I looked this was an open forum & as long as TOU isn't violated you really don't have much say in that gets posted.

I'm also happy to see that you think you know how I feel about you.

Also... in my previous post... I believe I made a valid point concerning the subject matter.
"Seeds do not care about a piece of paper or a bunch of binary, octal, hexadecimal numbers stored on some agencies hard drive. They will act as nature intended them to, without regard to the rules man is attempting to place upon nature.

I believe the above statement is self evident and does not need an internet link for proof.

 

[MJPassion]

Your intentions with every thread you've started thus far is to act as if you know everything & those that disagree w you are attacked by you in one form or another.

You don't want opinions...
THEN KEEP YOURS OUT AS WELL!!!

GFYS you egomaniacal control freak!

 

[Beta Test Team]

That is why I asked you not to post in this thread. You cannot control yourself, and resort to calling people names and using the f-bomb. Please go post some where else.

This site shouldn't be littered with posts like you just made.

 

[harry74]

My apologies for my off topics.

Anyway, I´m not very fond of Wahabí Madrassas and Science Talibans.

I´m more fond of Wasabi to be honest...

Enjoy another salt&pepperless thread.

 

[Jericho Mile]

progressing cock magic....melt down eminent

 

[canned abyss1]

Interesting thread, I hope it gets back on track.

 

[JeanGreens]

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.

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.

 

[idiit]

the thread I didn't know existed! i'm subbed.

great topic. lots of potential to inform us on something we need to be informed on.