Monsanto And Syngenta About To Receive Dozens Of Patents On Unpatentable Plants
from the literally-above-the-law dept
Last month we wrote about the strange case of unpatentable plants becoming patentable in Europe thanks to a decision from the European Patent Office's Enlarged Board of Appeal. That cleared the way for companies to obtain such patents, and according to this post on the "no patents on seeds" site -- I think you can probably work out where its biases lie -- that's about to happen:
the European Patent Office (EPO) is about to grant 30 patents on plants derived from conventional breeding to Monsanto and its affiliated companies. The Swiss company Syngenta can expect to receive around a dozen patents very soon. Many of the patents claim vegetables such as tomatoes, peppers, cauliflower, carrots and lettuce.
Leaving aside the important question of whether it should be possible to obtain patents on plants, there are some other issues. For example, Monsanto is currently trying to acquire Syngenta. Although its initial offer of $45 billion was turned down, the view seems to be that Monsanto will go higher because it needs Syngenta's broad portfolio of products to address the growing concerns over glyphosate, which lies at the heart of much of its range. According to a recent report, Monsanto is willing to divest itself of all of Syngenta's "seeds and genetic traits businesses as well as some overlapping chemistry assets to win regulatory approval", but it's not clear whether that would include patents on plants. If it didn't, all of the imminent plant patents mentioned above might end up with Monsanto, which would represent a dangerous concentration of power in this important new area.
The more serious problem concerns the EPO. The decision to extend patentability to plants was taken by the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal, which should raise conflict of interest concerns, since the EPO is funded by patent fees. That wouldn't be a serious problem if there were a higher court to which appeals could be made. But as the EPO told Intellectual Property Watch:
Decisions made by the Enlarged Board of Appeal cannot be challenged before another judiciary.
One body that does have the power to revise EPO decisions is the Administrative Council of the EPO, but it is made up largely of senior patent officials from the 40 or so member states of the EPO, and so it is naturally pro-patent and thus unlikely to interfere with extensions to patentability. In fact, there is no democratically-elected body at all that could force the EPO to change its policy on anything. Worse, the EPO is literally above national laws, since its offices enjoy diplomatic immunity of the kind given to embassies. As Wikipedia explains it:
The premises of the European Patent Office enjoy a form of extraterritoriality. In accordance with the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities, which forms an integral part of the European Patent Convention under Article 164(1) EPC, the premises of the European Patent Organisation, and therefore those of the European Patent Office, are inviolable. The authorities of the States in which the Organisation has its premises are not authorized to enter those premises, except with the consent of the President of the European Patent Office.
While that's the case -- and there's very little prospect of it changing in the short-term -- extensions of patentability to non-patentable matter are not just likely to happen, but will be well-nigh impossible to reverse.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: eu, patents, plants
Companies: monsanto, syngenta
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Mongenta
[ link to this | view in thread ]
total immunity?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Abolish Patents
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: total immunity?
Granting patents on vegetables may well prove to be just that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Abolish Patents
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Abolish Patents
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
And the law covers ALL plant breeders.
Anyway, plant patents only last 20 years.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: total immunity?
After all, it's only worth something if the local powers enforce it and that largely depends on quid-pro-quo from the locals. Unlike a nation state, an independent body does have much to offer in return for immunity....
Besides, I'm quite sure that buried somewhere in EU law is oversight of EPO by EU institutions....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
'Evergreening' was never a more apt name
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Epo
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: total immunity?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Epo
https://register.epo.org/smartSearch?searchMode=smart&query=monsanto
I don't which are the ones in question, I'm afraid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: total immunity?
And Monsanto could sure teach them a thing or two on that, couldn't they?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Absolutely wrong. If they can continue to milk a cash cow, they will do so, even if they also have newer products.
And even if they did make a tweak, that would constitute something new and that old version would go off patent and the new one would be under new patent.
There are various ways in which the effective duration of a patent can be extended.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreening
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They don't make much money on old versions of seeds and farmers don't necessarily want tweaked versions of 20 year old seeds. Considering the cost to bring a seed to market, it doesn't make financial sense to tweak older versions.
And I believe the first generation of RR soybeans are about to go off patent. You won't see them evergreening them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]