|
Monsanto sues and sues and sues and... Editor's note: A selection of other CropChoice news and commentary items are listed following this commentary. -- RS
by Paul Beingessner
(Monday, July 14, 2003 -- CropChoice guest commentary) -- Monsanto and President George Bush have one thing in common. Both have a
liking for the "walk softly and carry a big stick" form of public
relations. Bush uses his big economic stick to gain the support of
various nations in his quest to make the world safe for American
corporations. Monsanto also uses a big economic stick - the big stick of
the courtroom, to beat up those who fall afoul of its litigious nature.
And, like George Bush, Monsanto has been pretty successful with these
tactics. After all, the effect of a cluster bomb dropping on the home
quarter would not be much more devastating than the effect of being sued
by a huge corporation that is willing and able to spend millions to gain
its ends.
Monsanto is very determined to defend its position that farmers must buy
new seed of its patented genetically modified crops each year. Monsanto
has built a whole department to enforce its seed patents and licensing
agreements. It has 75 employees and an annual budget of $10 million.
An estimated 400 farmers have received threats of legal action from
Monsanto over alleged patent infringement. While Canadian farmers will
be familiar with the trials and tribulations of Percy Schmeiser, names
like Homan McFarling and Nelson Farms should resonate with American
producers. Few of these cases ever get to court because most farmers
look at the odds of outlasting Monsanto and simply give in. A clause in
Monsanto's licensing agreement allows Monsanto to take such cases in the
U.S. before courts in Missouri. This can add a huge amount to the legal
bills of farmers who might be thousands of miles away.
Several of the cases that have gone to court are enough to scare farmers
into meek submission to Monsanto's demands. Homan McFarling was fined
$780,000 for growing Roundup Ready soybeans without paying Monsanto's
licensing fee. Tennessee farmer Kem Ralph was fined $1.7 million and
sentenced to eight months in jail for a variety of offenses that began
with a Monsanto lawsuit.
Monsanto must be pleased with the results of its aggressive legal
campaign. So pleased, in fact, it has decided to branch out. Monsanto's
latest foray into the courtroom has it suing a dairy in Maine, alleging
that Oakhurst Dairy's marketing campaign that touts its milk as being
free of artificial growth hormones is misleading. Monsanto further
claims Oakhurst's ads and labels are deceptive and disparage Monsanto's
products by implying that milk from untreated cows is better than milk
from hormone-treated cows.
Monsanto is the world's only producer of artificial bovine growth
hormone (BGH). This product is banned in Canada and elsewhere because of
concerns about its impact on humans and the cows that are injected with
it. In the U.S., where BGH is legal, some dairy farmers have captured a
niche market by declaring that they do not use it on their cows. The
Oakhurst Dairy label is simple enough: "Our Farmers' Pledge: No
Artificial Growth Hormones." Who would have thought that a simple
statement of the truth could have such dire consequences?
Oddly enough, it would not be unexpected if Monsanto were to name the
state of Maine as a co-defendant. Maine has a program, the Quality
Trademark Seal, which can only be carried on dairy products that are
guaranteed free of artificial growth hormones.
Monsanto's latest legal moves have angered farmers and consumers alike.
Oakhurst Dairy defends the right of consumers to know what is in the
milk they drink. Farmers who currently produce this milk would lose the
ability to differentiate their product if Monsanto's suit is successful.
Other dairies, which make similar claims, will be watching.
Monsanto treads on thin ice with its aggressive litigation. However, it
need not fear the same consumer backlash that other companies might
face. Monsanto does not sell directly to the average consumer. Rather,
its customers are farmers who often have no other place to go if they
want to grow certain products. Because of this dependency relationship,
farmers cannot afford to stay angry at Monsanto forever. Monsanto, on
the other hand, can enjoy the exercise of its brute power with little
fear of repercussions. It is a situation that could easily get worse.
(c) Paul Beingessner (306) 868-4734 phone, 868-2009 fax
Also on CropChoice:
|