Journal of Intellectual Property Rights

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Genetically Modified Crops Controversy:The Actualization of Intellectual Property Rights Regime


Affiliations
1 Ebonyi State University, Enugu-Abakaliki Rd, Ntezi Abba, Abakaliki, Nigeria
 

Genetically modified crops have generated a lot of controversy on intellectual property rights. GM crops, also called Genetically Engineering (GE) crops contain altered genetic materials, or have genes transferred from other organisms to introduce new agronomic traits to production. The common targeted traits of GM crops include herbicide tolerance, pet, and pathogen resistance, a biotic stress tolerance, and product quality. GM technology has been applied in many major field crops, including soybean, corn, cotton, and canola by planting GM crops. Farmers may benefit from increased yields, less use of herbicide and pesticide, lower production costs, reduced cost of labour and capital equipment, and improved agricultural productivity. This paper critically appraises genetically modified crops, vis-a-vis, intellectual property rights, and satisfies itself that controversy really exists. It describes the benefits that genetic modified seed can provide to farmers, as well as the concerns that farmers should address before utilizing these seeds. It appraises the case for and against genetically modified crops and opines that the case for genetically modified crops is meritorious.

Keywords

Genetics, Modified Crops, Actualization, Intellectual Property, Technology, World Trade Organization, Bacillus thuringiensis, State of Food and Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization, Environmental Protection Agency.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Note in this test, the two concepts (genetically modified foods or genetically modified crops) will be used interchangeably, which of course means the same thing.

  • Agricultural Genetic Modification as the purposeful addition of a foreign gene or genes to the genome of an organism. A gene holds information that will give the organism a trait.

  • Levis, The theory of property rights and protection of intellectual and industrial property, (1978) 525-530.

  • Jacobs F G & White R C A, The European Convention on Human Rights. 2nd ed, (Oxford: Clarendon Press (1996) 246- 247.

  • www.who.int, (accessed on 10 October 2017).

  • The Seed Companies also protect their investment by applying for and litigating patent rights. Patenting plant genes is an area of the law currently in flux. Thomas John R, May investors obtain utility patents on plants? Preview o f United States Supreme Court Cases. Seed companies protect these patents in the context of relations with individual growers by relying on their contractual relations with each grower.

  • Hamilton N, Legal Issues in Biotechnology, Proceedings from Annual Meeting of the American Agricultural Law Association (2001).

  • http://www.biotechknowledge.monsanto.com/biotech/bbasic s.nsf/indexor Techniques of Plant Biotechnology from the National Centre or Biotechnology Education (accessed 13 July 2017).

  • Monsanto Company v Schmeiser Enterprises Ltd. Here, the Courts also held that if the parties cannot agree on the guantum of profits. Schmeiser would have to pay $15,450 to Monsanto, http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/gurt/default.htm (accessed 14 July 2017).

  • Dorris E A, Monsanto Contract: To sign or not to Sign, Mississippi Farmer, 1December 2000.

  • Colorado State University, Transgenic Crops: An Introduction and Resource Guide, http:www.collllllosate.edu/programs/lifescience/TransgenicCrop/risks.html (accessed on14 July 2017).

  • Steve C, GMO: Issues Rolls On, ABA Banking Journal (February 2000).

  • Holmberg M, I-P Crops: Mission impossible; Problems in producing non- genetically modified; Identify- Preserved crops, Successful Farming,15 February 2001. The presence of GM characteristics in soybean plants was within limits of most production contracts. But the presence of these characteristics in soybeans were also more surprising to the researcher, since soybeans are self-pollinating and thus considered less susceptible to pollen drift.

  • Blomquist R, Toward reconceptualising liability to neighbours for crop, livestock and personal damages from agricultural chemical drift, Oklahoma Law Review, Summer 1995.

  • Hamilton N, Legal issues: Shaping society's acceptance of biotechnology and genetically modified organisms, Drake Journal o f Agricultural Law, Spring 2001.

  • US Department of State, frequently asked questions about biotechnology, 21 March 2000.

  • Associated Press, Biotech corn discovered in beer product, Washington Post, 13 January 2001.

  • Pollack A, U S finds no allergies to altered corn, New York Times, 14 June 2001.

  • James C, ISAAA Brief, Executive summary, 35 (2006), www.isaaa.r/resources/publications/briefs/35/executivesummary/default.html (accessed on 12 September 2017).

  • Hanrahan C E , U S European Agricultural Trade. Food Safety and Biotechnology Issues, 1998, http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs/permalink/mete-crs-518:1 (accessed on 1 September 2017).

  • Questions about Genetically Modified Organism: An article by the Prince of Wales (http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/speeches/agriculture-01061999.html) and Seeds of Disaster: An article by the Prince of Wales (http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/speeches/agriculture-0801998.html) (accessed on 12 June 2017).

  • Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae, Nature, 399 (6733) (May 1999) 214.

  • Colorado State University, Transgenic Crops: An Introduction and Resource Guide.

  • Bt and the Monarch Butterfly: Update by Dr. Douglas Powell (AGCare Updatr Magazine, http://www.agcare.org/AGCareupdate.htmmonarch (accessed on 2 June 2017).

  • The New York residents from Mahattsan, long Island, New Paltz, White Plains, Rochester, Syracuse, Ithaca, and Binghamton. Gathered at the New York State Capitol in Albany, on 8 March 2016 to rally and lobby their legislators to make GMO labelling the Law in New York State.

  • Barboza D, Redesigning America, New York Times, 17 March 2000, 325.

  • Nordlee J A, Identification of a Brazil-nut allergen in transgenic soybeans, New England Journal o f Medicine, 334 (11) (1996) 688-692.

  • Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine, Lancet, 354 (9187) (October 1999) 1353; Safety of genetically modified food questioned: Interview with gene scientist, Dr Arpad Pusztai, http://www.wsws.org/ article/1999/jun1999/gmo-jo3.shtml (accessed on 12 June 2017).

  • Colorada State University. Almost half of the US Soybeans crop and twenty five percent of the US Corn crops is of a GM variety.

  • Sipress A & Kauffman M, US challenges EU's biotech food standard, Washington Post, (2001) 103.

  • In an open letter from Monsanto CEO Robert B Shapira to Rockefeller Foundation President, Gordon Conway, Monsanto, announced it will not pursue technologies that render seed sterile, http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/gurt/ default.htm (accessed on 10 July 2017).

  • Japan to bring mandatory tests for GM food, Nature, 402 (December 1999) 846.

  • Smugglers aim to circumvent GM court ban in Brazil, Nature, 402 (November 1999) 344-345.

  • http/www.biodiv.org/doc/legal/cartagena-protocal-en.Doc (accessed on 10 October 2016).


Abstract Views: 196

PDF Views: 120




  • Genetically Modified Crops Controversy:The Actualization of Intellectual Property Rights Regime

Abstract Views: 196  |  PDF Views: 120

Authors

Cordelia Chinwe Nwogbo Egwu
Ebonyi State University, Enugu-Abakaliki Rd, Ntezi Abba, Abakaliki, Nigeria
Chijioke Egwu
Ebonyi State University, Enugu-Abakaliki Rd, Ntezi Abba, Abakaliki, Nigeria

Abstract


Genetically modified crops have generated a lot of controversy on intellectual property rights. GM crops, also called Genetically Engineering (GE) crops contain altered genetic materials, or have genes transferred from other organisms to introduce new agronomic traits to production. The common targeted traits of GM crops include herbicide tolerance, pet, and pathogen resistance, a biotic stress tolerance, and product quality. GM technology has been applied in many major field crops, including soybean, corn, cotton, and canola by planting GM crops. Farmers may benefit from increased yields, less use of herbicide and pesticide, lower production costs, reduced cost of labour and capital equipment, and improved agricultural productivity. This paper critically appraises genetically modified crops, vis-a-vis, intellectual property rights, and satisfies itself that controversy really exists. It describes the benefits that genetic modified seed can provide to farmers, as well as the concerns that farmers should address before utilizing these seeds. It appraises the case for and against genetically modified crops and opines that the case for genetically modified crops is meritorious.

Keywords


Genetics, Modified Crops, Actualization, Intellectual Property, Technology, World Trade Organization, Bacillus thuringiensis, State of Food and Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization, Environmental Protection Agency.

References