46 votes

Corporatism Wins, Again: SCOTUS Unanimously rules in favor of Monsanto, vs an Indiana Farmer!

Monsanto wins landmark case in Supreme Court

Published on May 13, 2013

On Monday, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of the bio-tech giant Monsanto. In the case, Indiana farmer Vernon Bowman was being accused of seed infringement after he allegedly planted soybean seed without the company's permission. RT's Liz Wahl brings us more on the landmark case and how the 75 year-old man violated Monsanto's patent.

Monsanto taking over America's agriculture: New victory in Supreme Court

Published on May 13, 2013

A battle between Monsanto and an Indiana farmer ended on Monday after the Supreme Court found Vernon Bowman guilty of patent infringement. The 75-year-old farmer is expected to pay approximately $85,000 in damages. Many see this as a major blow against smaller farmers across the country and fear this ruling can threaten the livelihood of thousands of farmers. Patent attorney Mark Walters, who represented the defendant, joins us to discuss the details of the case and what this means for America's agriculture future.
Find RT America in your area: http://rt.com/where-to-watch/
Or watch us online: http://rt.com/on-air/rt-america-air/

Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTAmerica
Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_America


WaPo: Supreme Court [UNANIMOUSLY] rules for Monsanto in genetically modified soybean case

By Robert Barnes
May 13, 2013

The Supreme Court agreed with Monsanto on Monday that an Indiana farmer’s un­or­tho­dox planting of the company’s genetically modified soybeans violated the agricultural giant’s patent.

The court unanimously rejected farmer Vernon Hugh Bowman’s argument that he was not violating Monsanto’s patent because the company’s pesticide-resistent “Roundup Ready” soybeans replicate themselves. Justice Elena Kagan said there is no such “seeds-are-special” exception to the law.

“We think that blame-the-bean defense tough to credit,” Kagan wrote. “Bowman was not a passive observer of his soybeans’ multiplication; or put another way, the seeds he purchased (miraculous though they might be in other respects) did not spontaneously create eight successive soybean crops.”

LA Times: Supreme Court [UNANIMOUSLY] rules in favor of Monsanto in seed-patenting case

By David G. Savage
May 13, 2013, 9:13 a.m.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court gave a victory to Monsanto and other makers of patented seeds Monday, ruling they can prohibit farmers from growing a second crop from their genetically engineered seeds.

In a unanimous decision, the court said the patent for a specialized seed outlives the first planting. Otherwise, these seed patents would be “largely worthless,” said Justice Elena Kagan in explaining the decision.

Agri-business giants like Monsanto will be relieved by the ruling. They told the court they had spent huge sums of money and devoted years of effort to develop special seeds that can resist disease and grow more bountiful crops. The companies then obtained patents on these seeds, giving them an exclusive right to profit from them.


SCOTUS Ruling/Opinion .PDF: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-796_c07d.pdf

Bowman vs Monsanto

Cornell Univ. Law School Coverage Page: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/11-796

Setting aside the immorality of using a Monsatan GMO toxic products to begin with, so...now buying and using a second hand purchased product beyond 'licensing period,' wholly from someone else who is still 'lawfully contracted,' is "unanimously" 'illegal'??

I'd submit, that in the finality, this case isn't even about IP, per-se, it's more about the veracity of our natural right to voluntarily associate and make contracts and freely exchange goods and services in the second-hand market!

Hey, don't govt a-holes do that everyday, when they hire/contract third party PRIVATE services to intentionally commit crimes: conduct 4th Amendment violating warrantless searches (in addition to their already UnConstitutional warrantless wiretaps, etc. using State mechanisms), simply by outsourcing to those whom 'legally can'??

So what's the diff?

Quite contrary to their ruling a similar 'second hand IP use' case involving books: Supap Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

SCOTUS Ruling/Opinion .PDF: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-697_d1o2.pdf

Mayor Ny's post on it.

Rules for Thee, but Not for Me!


UPDATE 1: Courtesy of Betty Liberty

FYI: May 25th - Global March Against Monsanto! To find an event near you: http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/

UPDATE 2: RT America Videos added; see at the top of the page.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

He should have the right.

He should have the right to plant the seeds that he bought and do what he chooses to do with them without penalty. They are his seeds!
The problem is Monsanto's. If they don't want people growing the seeds they develop, then they should improve their game(methods) and make seeds that will not regrow. But since they can't do that the Supreme Court has done a wrong against us all to make things "right" for Monsanto. It's all about making things work for them, even if it's unreasonable and unjust.


I'm ready to believe anything evil about both Monsanto and the Supreme Court, which is, I am afraid, not very reasonable of me.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Can't find local info

I tried to find out where the protest is going to be in Cincinnati, but no specific location is mentioned on the website. Anyone?

Correctly Decided

Our constitution and laws apply equally to everyone; including POS companies like Monsanto. If you read the opinion of the court and the lower courts they all conclude the same thing. There is literally no question Mr. Bowman violated the patent.

If the law stinks it is not the job of the Supreme Court to change it; it is the job of Congress. Patents are an important part of liberty. They allow someone to be creative and be rewarded for their efforts. The defenders of liberty have to be bold and defend the worst of the worst sometimes. Such is the case here. Afterall, imagine a scenario where Mr. Bowman invented the bean and Monsanto said they could reproduce it and sell it without paying Mr. Bowman...not as evil sounding that way.

sharkhearted's picture

What happens when you have supreme court justices....

...who engage in criminal acts...like this ruling??

Time to clean house in the US Government. Time to, as we the people have the legal right to do as set forth in the Declaration of Independence, to "alter or abolish the government, and reinstitute new government that best effects our safety and our happiness."

Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.


Is their noone who will stand up for our farmers and not big agra?


So that is what they plan to do with the money from the tax hikes.


Protect your assets and profit from the greatest wealth transfer in history.

Why you can't patent life

Patenting living organisms is flawed logic. No one MADE a living thing on earth, all man has done is manipulate (screw up) a perfectly good plant that God created. Once Monsanto creates its own living organism without COPYING what is already created they can put all patents on their monster "food" they want!!!!! In this case the farmer did not COPY a patent, the seeds REPRODUCED themselves through a natural process. This is another example of criminalizing nature and pretending that the creation can be owned.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
Thomas Jefferson

cross breeding

Gmo crops will cross breed with non gmo.Monsanto still wins.unbelievable

Money talks and dogs bark

viral crops

meanwhile the modified organisms that Monsanto is releasing into the wild, are contaminating crops around the entire globe. This process of cross-fertilization is completely out of their control and exactly what they wanted from the beginning. This way they can slap a lawsuit on every farmer/person for copyright infringement although they are the real culprit with their viral crops infesting the globe.

This script is so bad that hollywood would reject it, but hey, sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction

life's 2 short 4 mistakes

Monsanto is liable

If you damage someones property via genetic pollution you are liable. Everything is upside down in this unjust society.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
Thomas Jefferson

This was posted on a local organizer's FB page

for the march against Monsanto/GMO.

Monsanto and the US Government

Supreme Court Judge, Clarence Thomas: Former Monsanto Lawyer

Hilary Clinton: Former Monsanto Lawyer
Head of the FDA (Food and Drug Administration), Michael Taylor: Former Monsanto Exec

Dir, USDA, Roger Beachy: Director, Monsanto Danforth Center

Deputy Admin EPA, Linda Fisher: VP, Government & Public Affairs

Ag Negotiator Trade Rep, Islam Siddiqui: Monsanto Lobbyist

And the list goes on, and on, and on...

I will be there

at my local protest to expose the collusion between Monsanto and government.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
Thomas Jefferson

Sounds like the seeds were defective

The farmer should get a refund since the seeds did not perform according to what he purchased. He purchased seeds that can't reproduce but they did anyway.

I hope

I hope people are starting to realize there is no political solutions to these problems.

Luke 3:38
Isaiah 43:3-5

Fight for your Life and Liberty!

It's a non-stop struggle, bro. It's just part of life and how we want to live ours and have our children live theirs. The struggle never end, and for some it never starts, they simply float along like a turd on the water. And all along, they are a turd all the way.

There are many ways to defend one's liberty

But I agree that all political solutions do is just continue the cycle of violence by legitimizing the state which only understands violence. You're living in la la land if you think you can ever manage govt. and get enough "good guys and gals" in there. Follow the way of Ghandi and opt out. Do not comply. Resist non-violently in any way that you can.

But the first step is to free yourself to the best of your ability and lead by example.


Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. ~Thomas Paine

"But I agree that all

"But I agree that all political solutions do is just continue the cycle of violence by legitimizing the state which only understands violence."

You must be agreeing with someone else, because I don't agree with you. I can agree about being non-violent.

Again, it's a non-stop struggle. You have to pay attention about what's going on around you and put forth an effort to stop what you feel is wrong--simple as that. Or of course you can be Mr. Turd.

that is odd...

because the farmer isn't "creating seeds", he's just using them...

patents don't stop people from buying or using something, only re-creating and selling them.

he is not "selling seeds" he can't be in violation of a patent.

I use Blue Wave, but don't expect one of THEIR silly taglines.


I don't want it to be easy for farmers to use GMO seeds because of their infective nature(spreading the GMO traits to nearby non-GMO plants), so this particular case doesn't bother me if the guy knew it was GMO seed. I don't like the idea that this case might be used to affect other cases based on unwanted GMO attributes infecting other peoples crops. In those cases, I think Monsanto should have to pay to replace the infected GMO crop with a non-GMO crop as well as compensate any other damages, rather than assume that people wanted to steal the GMO attribute.

SteveMT's picture

Not one so-called Justice agreed with this farmer.

That speaks volumes about who are their masters.

No Big Surprise

Monsanto and the supreme court are a revolving door. It gets worse though. Think maybe you can get away from gmo's by perhaps foraging and living off the land? Think again. This planet is screwed.


Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's

and use heirloom seeds in the future (while we still can, before the EU madness crosses the ocean)

“Although it was the middle of winter, I finally realized that, within me, summer was inextinguishable.” — Albert Camus

Rules for thee but not for me

Dictators command do as I say not as I do.

This breaks down the rule of law and forces everyone to the lowest level. the laws of the jungle. Eat or be eaten.

NO TO GMO, What ever happened to Frankenstien in the end?

It wont end well.


a patent filed after 1996

is only good for 20 years, generic versions can begin in 7 years.

If it can be proved that GMO roundup plants are killing bees, then a class action lawsuit by everyone who eats can be slapped on Monsanto and we can put them under.

DakotaKid's picture

Monsanto Protection Act...

Research the Monsanto Protection Act

The company is not liable for anything.

Monsanto already ad the victory,

when the farmer planted their death-seeds...why was this case a win for Monsanto? The farmer handed them the case way before this sideshow was ruled upon by the Supreme Corporate, I mean Court of the United States...either way the crop was sewn and the soil isn't so quick to forget.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

how do we know that Monsanto didn't hire the farmer

to bring a losing case against them to create legal precedent.

That dude was an idiot. Mistake #1 - buying seed from


#2 - save seed from that crop and replant without paying Monsanto for the privilege.

Solution - STOP buying seed from those asshats.

There, I just save him $85,000.

Countless claims against Monsanto, only one makes it to SCOTUS

As fishyculture wrote in the other thread:

How did THIS case get to SCOTUS?

Trust me, no one wants Monsatan bankrupted more than me, but this case is so ridiculous it is almost like they LET it get to SCOTUS while preventing the gazillion legitimate claims against Monsanto to be heard. Now any farmer with a gripe about Monsanto will be assumed to be like this one.

I give this a +1, couldn't have said it better. There was NO REASON for this case to go to the Supreme Court. The award against Bowman would have stood if the SC had declined to take the case. The Supreme Court unanimous endorsement was a political statement.

Take back the GOP and Restore America Now.