yardgrazer
Well-known member
PS: I would give away, but not sell, F2s. Not broadly, mind you, but to friends, maybe someone else who I felt had a real need.
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
I love how so many think that a person's time has no value. That a learned skill has no value. The YEARS of knowledge it takes to amass to actually do it correctly.
The reason cannabis is all poly-hybrid, unstable, tragically all becoming the same - and showing more and more signs of inbreeding depression (MAC1 sterility for example) is because people have been doing the same thing for the last 60 years and now we face the unintentional consequences of the hacks that came before our current hacks.
Just because you can cook a meal, doesn't make you a chef. I believe there is a difference between pollen chuckers and breeders and it isn't just the quality of the plants selected.
I recently had a graphic artist who does AMAZING work offer to redesign the Stank Bros label. I declined 3 times, simply because there is no point.
If I offer anything of value, it must be unique. If it's unique - Greenpoint will just steal it and make poorly selected, lesser versions of it - and destroy the credibility of the line and my work and my effort.
Companies like that DO have a massive negative impact.
Remember why DJ Short took his toys and went home??? Yep. Because of people F2'ing his works for re-sale and cutting his legs off. Same reason Breeder Steve quit. Same reason MANY others have quit...
And it's the same reason you won't see NEW quality being released - all you'll get is the reduced regurgitation of creative minds past.
The newbies support the hacks vying for access - and in turn, ensure that real access is driven further and further back into the underground.
dank.Frank
The reason cannabis is all poly-hybrid, unstable, tragically all becoming the same - and showing more and more signs of inbreeding depression (MAC1 sterility for example) is because people have been doing the same thing for the last 60 years and now we face the unintentional consequences of the hacks that came before our current hacks.
Just because you can cook a meal, doesn't make you a chef. I believe there is a difference between pollen chuckers and breeders and it isn't just the quality of the plants selected.
I recently had a graphic artist who does AMAZING work offer to redesign the Stank Bros label. I declined 3 times, simply because there is no point.
If I offer anything of value, it must be unique. If it's unique - Greenpoint will just steal it and make poorly selected, lesser versions of it - and destroy the credibility of the line and my work and my effort.
Companies like that DO have a massive negative impact.
Remember why DJ Short took his toys and went home??? Yep. Because of people F2'ing his works for re-sale and cutting his legs off. Same reason Breeder Steve quit. Same reason MANY others have quit...
And it's the same reason you won't see NEW quality being released - all you'll get is the reduced regurgitation of creative minds past.
The newbies support the hacks vying for access - and in turn, ensure that real access is driven further and further back into the underground.
dank.Frank
G
Gauss
That's probably the most constructive and poignant post I've ever read on this site, Frank.
You can breed in a closet as a newbie,and attitude will put you on their list of breeders.You just have to give them 50-70% of the sales.There is very very little integrity involved and it's just going to get worse unfortunately.
Last edited:
CaptainDankness
Well-known member
I still don't see a big deal, Nirvana has been making decent hacks for a long time. Of course, a lot of us will go to the original breeder, but almost everyone put out a Widow hack in the 90's.
We do still have access to the old school strains of Mr. Nice, Sensi, Dutch Passion, etc. So we don't have to work the same OG, Cookie, Gellato's etc. Like the bandwagon growers, really I think these strains could be improved with some of the older more stable strains.
The fact that these old seed banks still exist is proof a lot of us do value the original genetics and breeders, but I guarantee if you or a friend found a great cut of SSH you'd probably use it, as would any of us. No reason I should owe Shantibaba anything if I find a diamond in 100 seeds, I doubt he still pays the farmer in India who gave him the world famous multi million dollar strain White Widow, I'm sure the original breeder still makes charras for a living, while Shantibaba is a rock star. Of course, Shantibaba is a good breeder and respectable but he'd have nothing without "stealing" genetics as would Nevil.
Of course then you have the hacks like Subcool who started off with 1 male and a small grow tent full of CA clone onlys and is now a millionaire. When it's that easy, of course people are going to chuck pollen. Apparently it works too somehow, since half these clone onlys are coming from accidental hermie pollen. Makes one almost not want to work with them, but they are winning cups.
I like to buy my seeds from the original breeders, but DJ is too expensive for a proper selection.
G
Gauss
Those landrace originals get brought back and go rumspringa, they're usually so inbred and adapted to whatever specific biome they came from that they (arguably) are not the same plant after a single generation as is grown by the original farmer. Should the farmers get credit and reimbursement, yea in my opinion. Although, to get those strains ready for "domestication" a great deal of work and selection is done. If you've ever grown a pure landrace straight off the boat it's not what I would call fun or fulfilling. It's hard work and takes a very keen eye.
Most of these farmers don't even pull their males at all, they have very little ambition in regard to cannabis and very little inclination to go with it. If they were growing straight fire that would be one thing, but honestly most of that weed is about a hair away from schwag. When you go across the world collecting these things from many different farmers in many different places I think that's more work than sowing a field year after year with almost no regard to contributing to cannabis as a whole. They aren't getting swindled, they are being helped. There's no magic temple out there with a goose that shits golden nugs, it definitely does not work that way. To work that kind of stuff to then be compelling to consumers in the rest of the world a great deal of work has to be done and time put in by people who really know what they are doing— it's an effort that makes Chief Joe Sixpack's intellectual work look like chopping a salad. To me, that makes a big difference as far as the ethics of marketability go. Not to say the farmers should be screwed, but to say they are getting reimbursed commensurately with the value of what they are capable of offering.
Most of these farmers don't even pull their males at all, they have very little ambition in regard to cannabis and very little inclination to go with it. If they were growing straight fire that would be one thing, but honestly most of that weed is about a hair away from schwag. When you go across the world collecting these things from many different farmers in many different places I think that's more work than sowing a field year after year with almost no regard to contributing to cannabis as a whole. They aren't getting swindled, they are being helped. There's no magic temple out there with a goose that shits golden nugs, it definitely does not work that way. To work that kind of stuff to then be compelling to consumers in the rest of the world a great deal of work has to be done and time put in by people who really know what they are doing— it's an effort that makes Chief Joe Sixpack's intellectual work look like chopping a salad. To me, that makes a big difference as far as the ethics of marketability go. Not to say the farmers should be screwed, but to say they are getting reimbursed commensurately with the value of what they are capable of offering.
Gauss, thank you for opening up a philosophy thread.
There’s a whole hell of a lot of very important shit flying around here. Many flower sniffers have no critical thinking skill, but maybe we can “contribute to the field,” and advance.
It might take a while to organize (my) takes on everything going on everywhere, and there should probably be a separate thread for: Breeder Court.
If we’re dealing in present controversy, it would be helpful to clarify arguments.
RIP, Cliff Branch.
There’s a whole hell of a lot of very important shit flying around here. Many flower sniffers have no critical thinking skill, but maybe we can “contribute to the field,” and advance.
It might take a while to organize (my) takes on everything going on everywhere, and there should probably be a separate thread for: Breeder Court.
If we’re dealing in present controversy, it would be helpful to clarify arguments.
RIP, Cliff Branch.
Yes, thanks Gauss for starting this one. It's a much needed discussion. And thanks also to all the other thoughtful commenters.
And always remember!
oof, that's SO quotable.
And always remember!
oof, that's SO quotable.
S
SandyFantasyman
.
Last edited:
yardgrazer
Well-known member
I thought about it more after posting, and realized there are two ways to think of something being "yours"... 1. that the actual physical thing belongs to you, and you can do what you like with it, and 2. beyond the legal sense, a loose "intellectual property" in the item, in that it was something you "created" rather than just "made"
I was treating this subject like it involved #1, without really addressing #2. I would feel free to do what I want with hybrid seeds I made, and might give away F2s, but I wouldn't feel like I could lay claim to either as a creation, because at the end of the day I'm just a pollen chukker, I'm no auteur. I'm the guy who lets two dogs have sex and gives away the puppies to good homes, not the breeder selecting for specific traits and maybe creating something unique. If something I do is unique, it's dumb luck.
I was treating this subject like it involved #1, without really addressing #2. I would feel free to do what I want with hybrid seeds I made, and might give away F2s, but I wouldn't feel like I could lay claim to either as a creation, because at the end of the day I'm just a pollen chukker, I'm no auteur. I'm the guy who lets two dogs have sex and gives away the puppies to good homes, not the breeder selecting for specific traits and maybe creating something unique. If something I do is unique, it's dumb luck.
S
SandyFantasyman
.
Last edited:
P
psilocybevybe
once our sacrament is de-monetized ,ownership,profit,fear,etc etc will fade...until then....
H
hard rain
In properly legal industries (cut flowers, veges etc) people absolutely do have legal claim to intellectual property when it come to plant breeding, and I am talking about the old fashioned selection method.
The only reason cannabis isn't subject to Plant Variety Rights is it's illegality. Not much real breeding going on yet with cannabis, most of it is multi hybrids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_breeders'_rights
Having possession of something and taking credit for it are two different beasts.
Work a cut into even something slightly different and it’s yours. Same with seed.
Work a cut into even something slightly different and it’s yours. Same with seed.
yardgrazer
Well-known member
Huh, well, I stand corrected. (Obviously) I wasn't aware of the varieties protection, nor the plant patent law.
At the same time, putting aside the illegality of marijuana, I do wonder how many "strains" would qualify for protection. In the US at least, it sounds like there are a number of requirements that would tend to make most strains ineligible? Namely, that the varieties have to be true breeding, or close to it? Still, could apply to some varieties.
Also, with the plant patent one, it only applies to asexually reproduced plants, including unique cuts. The thing being, the PTO info page says it has to have some distinguishing characteristic beyond those recognizable by a lay person? Also, it seems the patent only applies to asexual reproduction of the cut?
At the same time, putting aside the illegality of marijuana, I do wonder how many "strains" would qualify for protection. In the US at least, it sounds like there are a number of requirements that would tend to make most strains ineligible? Namely, that the varieties have to be true breeding, or close to it? Still, could apply to some varieties.
Also, with the plant patent one, it only applies to asexually reproduced plants, including unique cuts. The thing being, the PTO info page says it has to have some distinguishing characteristic beyond those recognizable by a lay person? Also, it seems the patent only applies to asexual reproduction of the cut?
There is no ethical way to own genetic material. It is the product of millions of years of evolution and is the birthright of all beings on the planet earth. You didn't make it and you can't own it.
A piece of paper may say otherwise, but that paper will be LONG gone before the genes are.
If you make seeds, sell those seeds. The genetic information contained within is not yours, though.
A piece of paper may say otherwise, but that paper will be LONG gone before the genes are.
If you make seeds, sell those seeds. The genetic information contained within is not yours, though.
yardgrazer
Well-known member
One thing I think the critical legal studies people are definitely right about is the adage "the law is a discourse in political power."
In this case, the power of big companies.
In this case, the power of big companies.
yardgrazer
Well-known member
PS: In most cases the power of big companies.
