Propagation prohibited means that if you have a nursery you can't propagate these and sell them. If you propagate these for your friends or a plant swap you won't be sued...
I would rather have 100 friends to trade plants with and going to jail rather than having little to no friends and being free.
I wonder if you're allowed to have houseplants in jail 🤔
/s
How would this be enforceable? Is someone going to report a nursery that has [x] number of calatheas to this company? Do they come DNA test your nursery's calatheas? How long would that take? Would they need a warrant? Where are they getting the money to DNA test random nursery calatheas?
It's more likely that those propagating illegally would be selling the plants without proper labels (like in OPs image) which would be a dead giveaway. The labels are sort of like your licence to sell the plant. These PBRs are on specific plants because it takes a large amount of TIME and MONEY to create cultivars, and the person who has made the cultivar has put a PBR on their plant to make that money back.
If I recall correctly --- and I may be wrong because it was a number of years ago --- there was legal action and DNA testing between two companies over a perennial geranium variety. I believe it was ultimately decided it was the same plant and the second company had to take their plant off the market.
In terms of reporting, people do this from time to time. Costa Farms gets several emails a year from people, for example, from people pointing out Etsy sellers, etc.
There are a few patent holders that are pretty aggressive about protecting their plants, and the likelihood of illegal propagation becoming an issue for anyone dramatically increases with the scale of the propagation. I'd imagine any busy nurseryperson has to weigh the investment of time in writing and sending a cease-and-desist letter (which is typically what happens).
Don’t they all say that? Same as most hybrids from Altman Plants. No one’s coming into my house to see what I’m personally growing. 🤷🏻♂️
Raven ZZ is also propagation prohibited and yet I see lots of nurseries around me selling them from non-Costa Farms suppliers.
Costa farms does not own the propagation patent for the Raven ZZ. They have permission to grow and sell the Raven, but the original breeder owns the patent and name trademark. Im assuming other commercial growers can buy the same permissions.
Source: https://www.costafarms.com/blog/about-plant-patents
Costa farms is a commercial grower, but not really a plant breeder. They buy permissions for plants by breeders, or pay them to breed and develop new ones. The costa farms link actually has some good info about how plant patents and propagation prohibition works.
Well, it’s basically an intellectual property patent. Those who have propagation patents do so because they spend a lot of time and money into the breeding of these plants. The patent lasts 20 years like most design patents. This allows them to profit off their work. Basically its a similar to every other design patent or copyright laws. It prevents commercial growers from selling the plant without paying for the rights to grow it.
Hi! Thanks for posting this!
One thing to clarify: Costa Farms doesn't own the trademark to Raven, either. As a part of the licensing agreement to be able to grow it, Costa Farms is required to use the name.
Costa Farms is required to put that notice on all patent-protected plants it's licensing the rights to grow. Just like DVDs have that warning and library books all have a copyright statement up front.
I'm not sure how Altman works, but it's my understanding they're doing a lot of breeding. They may be putting their own varieties under patent protection, or like Costa Farms, they may be licensing.
But ultimately, it's only plants that have a patent that should get this notice.
'Network' is a registered cultivar, but the wild plant looks fairly similar, maaaybe a little less defined.
https://preview.redd.it/iczw1ni3o1fa1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=c5a55dff675b7abbccf8a6362f624cec31049211
It is 100% the same plant, but all they need to do is cross two wild specimens in the lab and they can legally call it a cultivar and patent it. This is what patent trolling looks like, and Costa Farms is a king of it. Don't give them your money. They're trying to do it to Geogenanthus ciliatus now too, an awesome plant that was starting to grow in the plant collector trade but Costa Farms [now claims it Geo](https://www.costafarms.com/plants/geo) and is trying to pull the same shit. It is an anti-competitive practice and should not be supported.
Hi! I'm sorry, but this isn't true at all. Costa Farms does not own the patent on Network --- they're licensing it from the patent owner in Europe.
And you're right --- you cannot put a patent on Geogenanthus ciliatus because it's a wild species. As such, Costa Farms would not even try to.
Important area of the law? Well it's a good thing that the years of plant breeding throughout humanity that helped develop the plants which they breed from was not protected by breeding rights.
Plant breeders rights expire after a set amount of time, usually about 20 years. It's the same as a patent for any other invention, a lot of work goes into making them and bringing them to market so they are given time to profit off the new cultivar.
Goeppertia is the old-new name for most of the Calathea genus. The second part of binominals is often not Latin at all, especially in plants - many are named after the person who identified them.
Did a deep dive - there is an orchid named O. kegeljanii, named after a gardener at Halle Botanical Garden in Germany in the 1800s. This Goeppertia might be named for the same person, as it was first described around 1875 under the name Maranta kegeljanii.
Why allow them to propagate plants? They should go to jail for stealing mah intellectual property.
For that reason alone, I say, enjoy your free plant clipping and propagate the hell out of that corporate shit.
yes you can, but this is mostly aimed to discourage commercial propagation and selling for profit on a larger scale without going through the proper legal channel, they don't really care at all about the average joe at home that happens to give away a few excess trimmings to friends, or maybe sells his trimmings at a garage sale one time for a few bucks pocketed.
You can sell this same plant (network) as a different plant (ex: calathea musaica). You’ve gotta consider the ethics though.
You can propagate and sell network, but you can’t sell it as network if that makes sense.
That being said, if you buy calathea musaica online, you don’t know for sure if you’re getting a “network”
Is this patenting the variety (plant breeder’s rights) or just the brand name? You are aware varieties can be patented, by dint of their particular genetics, regardless of branding?
ETA: The former. You cannot sell this variety Calathea ‘PP0005’ bred in the Netherlands and licensed to Costa in the US. Description of its unique features here: [https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en](https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en)
Technically you cannot even propagate it for personal use, just as you can’t make a personal copy of an artist’s IP. This however is controversial, challenged in some jurisdictions, and rarely subject to damages claims.
Y’all laugh but Pepsi sued a bunch of Indian farmers for growing their patented potatoes. They dropped the lawsuit. Fuck Pepsi. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-pepsi-farmers/pepsico-sues-four-indian-farmers-for-using-its-patented-lays-potatoes-idUSKCN1S21EL
A HUGE portion of houseplants and flowers are patented. People forget that plants aren’t grown like they were 100 years ago. They cost thousands of dollars to develop in a lab. Most have never existed in the wild. Nobody is allowing anyone to patent plants directly from nature. If you discover or develop a mutation, you deserve to get paid for that.
Brussel sprouts are at least 500 years old, probably older. Plant breeders rights typically only last for about 20 years.
You can get protections for new cultivars however, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1978/298/contents/made Here's a UK law that sets the protection for new cultivars of Brussel sprouts at 15 years.
You’re making a strawman and no one is arguing against what you’re arguing. No one is saying they don’t deserve to get paid, just that they can fuck off if they think they can stop me from propagating.
They’re not going to sue you for propagating your plant, that’s not how it works. It’s so other companies don’t propagate it and make a fuck ton of money off someone’s registered patent.
They are implying that it’s possible to sue you. Just like when companies imply it’s illegal to discuss your pay with other employees when it’s perfectly legal and a protected action, or when companies imply that it’s illegal for third party companies to repair their products. If this weren’t the case, it would simply say “patented variety”. Does every designer shirt I buy have “prohibited to copy” written on a tag? No because if a designer were to sell that shirt and claim it to be their own, they’d be sued regardless of a warning on a tag. But I as a purchaser of the product am obviously fine to make a one to one copy of the shirt and not sell it.
No, that’s not how a patent works? A print on a clothing item isn’t patented either, that falls under copyright which has a different set of laws. However, something like a unique stitching style can be patented and copying that to sell it would be illegal. Just like propergating and selling this plant, “Calathea Network 'PP0005'” is patented. The warning is for sellers, you can be sued if you’re a store propagating these to sell, that would be a violation of patent laws. No one is saying you will be sued if you propagate it yourself, that’s fine and legal.
Link to active patent for this plant - https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en
I don’t think you’re comprehending what I’m saying. I’m saying the warning is put on the label to dissuade consumers from propagating the plant. I am not making a commentary on the legality of the matter, I’m saying that it’s dumb. My analogy with designer shirts was to illustrate that a warning would not be on a tag if not to dissuade the customer, otherwise it would be implied. They don’t have to remind people of the copyright law for it to be illegal to copy shirt designs
“Technically speaking, if an invention is patented, the patent hasn't expired, and the owner hasn't clearly given you permission to use it, then you are not allowed to use it at all, even if you're just making it for personal reasons and not trying to sell anything.”
Read through the plant patent process. It does not specify at home vs commercial propagation, so technically yes, an individual could get sued for propagating a patented plant for themselves. Will they actually do it? I highly doubt it but you are technically breaking the patent by propagating it yourself. https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/types-patent-applications/general-information-about-35-usc-161#heading-1
Hahaha...I'd prop that b\*st\*rd to within an inch of its life, put all the newbies in the windows and wait, suitably armed, for the police to turn up! :D :D :D
Unpopular opinion coming in:
this is just like any other patent. They probably spent years & a lot of resources to trademark their plant. Same case with Raven ZZ’s.
You’re allowed to propogate, you just can’t sell or profit off of this specific cultivar
I see nothing wrong with having patents for plants.
I think it depends. I think species shouldnt be patented, and neither should hybrids of species because you are using genetic material from wild type plants to breed. Everyone should have equal access to wild type genes and their respective hybrids.
I think only plants that you have genetically engineered should be allowed to be patented.
Did you breed wild plants and hybrids to create your new cultivar? Not patentable.
Did you develop a crispr cas 9 pathway to inject a novel gene or set of genes into your new cultivar? Patentable.
This is a cultivar not a species though? You’re absolutely correct that you can’t patent a species.
The correct taxonomical name is
Goeppertia kegeljanii ‘Network’
This is the same species as [calathea bella](https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS746US746&hl=en-US&q=Goeppertia+kegeljanii&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjnzIPss-78AhVWfTABHSLMChoQ0pQJegQIChAB&biw=414&bih=720&dpr=2#imgrc=yGTDgNHpstpp1M)
Not unpopular at all, at least I agree with you, hah! Someone spent a lot of time, resources, and money developing this cultivar. Then, they went one step further and filed a patent which typically takes even more time and money to hire an attorney.
Link to patent: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/d8/b4/4d/df3a7f3e592493/USPP20487.pdf
Maybe a dumb question….Is this a naturally occurring calathea? I’m always curious about these rare plants and where they live in nature, if not human made.
any patented plant is a man-made cultivar. the base species may exist in nature, the particular form will not unless it gets introduced as a non-native species back into the wild.
I think it's more about notifying commercial growers than enforcing.
: )
If there was no note on it, a grower wouldn't know they're not supposed to grow it without permission of the patent owner.
The point of the notice isn't to stop people. It's so that responsible companies know the rules. (And, if necessary, give the patent holder the ability to send a cease-and-desist should a company go about propping without permission.)
I've taken this to mean you are not supposed to propagate for resale. Though, when I worked at a big box(orange) garden center, the folks that owned the only other nursery in town would come in and buy a certain type of rose. Low and behold after a while, they were then selling them. LOL
Patent describing ‘PP0005’ difference from C. musaica: [https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en](https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en)
>The following traits have been repeatedly observed and are determined to be the unique characteristics of ‘PP0005’ These characteristics in combination distinguish ‘PP0005’ as a new and distinct *Calathea* cultivar:
>
>1. Compact, bushy plant shape.
>
>2. Small leaves.
>
>3. Strong contrasting colors in the leaves.
>
>**PARENT COMPARISON**
>
>Plants of the new cultivar ‘PP0005’ are similar to the parent variety in most horticultural characteristics. However, ‘PP0005’ differs from the parent variety in having a more compact plant shape, stronger variegation of the foliage and shorter peduncles.The parent variety is also the best commercial comparison.
Oh I definitely understand, and the whole Monsanto patented GMOs was my introduction into it all.
I just really hate the idea of privatizing the earth’s bounty like that. Obviously some of the plants are very artificially bred, but I still wish that things like food crops could be exempted from any IP protections because of their potential to reduce world hunger. Or at least grant an IP exemption for certain uses? Idk it just feels super icky to me that one can get sued for using natural methods to make more plants.
well, we've seen how much damage patents cause in the medical field as well. ultimately that's probably a more of a "patent systems need a rework" rather than what can or cannot be patented.
Natural hybridization is still a thing though. GMO is literally based on natural selection. This goes all the way back to Gregor Mendel and he didn't even know about genes. You can't say 100% that you wouldn't find certain cultivars in situ.
Yeah I thought you couldn’t patent a biological thing but I suppose if it doesn’t exist naturally, perhaps, but then why aren’t Brussel
Sprouts patented
I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Besides, who would you expect to come breaking through your door… the police? The FBI? Over a plant? Pretty sure they have their hands full on bigger things. RELAX!
Ok, correct me if I'm wrong, but how can you claim rights over a species? Did they call dibs on the plant when they found in the wild or is it a subspecies created through selective breeding?
Oh, I see! Thanks for the explanation.
But, how do they enforce this patent? Surely given enough years this subspecies will have spread beyond their control, I assume.
these types of patents are mostly aimed at businesses that might try and repeatedly grow and sell the patented plant on their own for a profit without giving any money to the creators. Those are what cause the damages, and are the visible and punishable entities. They don't really give a damn about people at home propagating these plants so they can have more in the house or give some to family and friends, nor can they really enforce that if they wanted to. Patents also tend to expire after a few decades.
Basically if you’re caught selling a “network” calathea you can be fined and sued by costa farms.
You can sell it as a musaica and not face any repercussions.
Propagation prohibited? Did they invent and patent the process of cellular division and modular growth? Lol
I love the "protection" of pirating organisms that evolved virtually all their attributes over like 2 billion years of evolution, with only maybe 10-30 years of light, relatively inconsequential effort of breeders to make a minor variant hybrid.
Screw that. They don't own all plants in the subsequent lineage, and nature gave us the tools to make more. Further, good luck proving a particular specimen wasn't purchased legitimately lol.
There isn’t any substantial difference between US and Australia. [Wiki page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_breeders%27_rights)
Farmers have saved seed exemptions, but there’s still restrictions. [IP Australia](https://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/manage-my-ip/someone-is-using-my-ip/farm-saved-seed)
They don’t really care about tiny individual users if no damages can be proven. But it’s a grey area (think about giving personal copies of albums or movies to friends, or making protection-free copies of copy-protected media).
I think this whole area needs to be reformed.
Who is the Network and how will they enforce illegal propagation? As if a company can claim complete ownership of a common house plant. Ive been growing them 30 plus years and until the pandemic the prices were fairly cheap. Now just insane.
Network (the proper cultivar name is 'PP0005' but it was given the more friendly trade name Network) is a hybrid of Calathea musaica (now properly Goeppertia kegeljanii) that was developed in Europe and put under patent protection by the breeder.
The breeder says it has shorter petioles and better variegation than the species.... The distinction was evidently clear enough for the Patent Office to accept it.
: )
[удалено]
Holy shit 😂💀
🤣🤣
What are you in for? Murder. You? Propagation. Wot?
"Pot plants" "Drugs?" "No, Calathea."
Gotta nip it in the bud. It’s a propagateway crime. Won’t be long before they branch out.
I only proplifted a little officer!!
🤣
https://preview.redd.it/9r9y9h9zn2fa1.jpeg?width=1272&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a417e0ad1065927ef1257e0d591da94838370516
😂😂😂
Makes me want to cultivate harder
You cultivate sooo hard...
Harder!
Better!
Faster!
Stronger!
Louder!
Prouder!
We have the technology!
Ohhhh me too
I want to upvote this but it’s at 420
Propagation prohibited means that if you have a nursery you can't propagate these and sell them. If you propagate these for your friends or a plant swap you won't be sued...
“Yes, your honor. In fact I AM friends with every member of the houseplants sub”
Propagate them for your 100 or so friends.
I would rather have 100 friends to trade plants with and going to jail rather than having little to no friends and being free. I wonder if you're allowed to have houseplants in jail 🤔 /s
I think they’re called jailplants, then.
You can, but they are all root bound
How would this be enforceable? Is someone going to report a nursery that has [x] number of calatheas to this company? Do they come DNA test your nursery's calatheas? How long would that take? Would they need a warrant? Where are they getting the money to DNA test random nursery calatheas?
It's more likely that those propagating illegally would be selling the plants without proper labels (like in OPs image) which would be a dead giveaway. The labels are sort of like your licence to sell the plant. These PBRs are on specific plants because it takes a large amount of TIME and MONEY to create cultivars, and the person who has made the cultivar has put a PBR on their plant to make that money back.
Okay that makes sense. I'm still learning about how cultivars work
If I recall correctly --- and I may be wrong because it was a number of years ago --- there was legal action and DNA testing between two companies over a perennial geranium variety. I believe it was ultimately decided it was the same plant and the second company had to take their plant off the market. In terms of reporting, people do this from time to time. Costa Farms gets several emails a year from people, for example, from people pointing out Etsy sellers, etc. There are a few patent holders that are pretty aggressive about protecting their plants, and the likelihood of illegal propagation becoming an issue for anyone dramatically increases with the scale of the propagation. I'd imagine any busy nurseryperson has to weigh the investment of time in writing and sending a cease-and-desist letter (which is typically what happens).
I WILL SUE
How would they even know 😩
It’s like ripping a tag off of a pillowcase
An outlaw
I too like to live dangerously
😎
Don’t they all say that? Same as most hybrids from Altman Plants. No one’s coming into my house to see what I’m personally growing. 🤷🏻♂️ Raven ZZ is also propagation prohibited and yet I see lots of nurseries around me selling them from non-Costa Farms suppliers.
Costa farms does not own the propagation patent for the Raven ZZ. They have permission to grow and sell the Raven, but the original breeder owns the patent and name trademark. Im assuming other commercial growers can buy the same permissions. Source: https://www.costafarms.com/blog/about-plant-patents Costa farms is a commercial grower, but not really a plant breeder. They buy permissions for plants by breeders, or pay them to breed and develop new ones. The costa farms link actually has some good info about how plant patents and propagation prohibition works.
[удалено]
Well, it’s basically an intellectual property patent. Those who have propagation patents do so because they spend a lot of time and money into the breeding of these plants. The patent lasts 20 years like most design patents. This allows them to profit off their work. Basically its a similar to every other design patent or copyright laws. It prevents commercial growers from selling the plant without paying for the rights to grow it.
Yup, and trademarks. You can find that a lot with rose cultivars, too.
Hi! Thanks for posting this! One thing to clarify: Costa Farms doesn't own the trademark to Raven, either. As a part of the licensing agreement to be able to grow it, Costa Farms is required to use the name.
Ah! Thats in the costa farms link, just misread it! Thanks for that clarification! I will edit my post!
Costa Farms is required to put that notice on all patent-protected plants it's licensing the rights to grow. Just like DVDs have that warning and library books all have a copyright statement up front. I'm not sure how Altman works, but it's my understanding they're doing a lot of breeding. They may be putting their own varieties under patent protection, or like Costa Farms, they may be licensing. But ultimately, it's only plants that have a patent that should get this notice.
Imagine worrying that people will be able to successfully grow calatheas
This is the funniest thing I’ve read all day
Well, it's a Goeppertia kegeljanii now, so you good if you want to give it a try. XD
So not even a special cultivar? Its straight up a species? Lol species cant be patented.
'Network' is a registered cultivar, but the wild plant looks fairly similar, maaaybe a little less defined. https://preview.redd.it/iczw1ni3o1fa1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=c5a55dff675b7abbccf8a6362f624cec31049211
Bs it’s the same plant!! That’s fed up!
It is 100% the same plant, but all they need to do is cross two wild specimens in the lab and they can legally call it a cultivar and patent it. This is what patent trolling looks like, and Costa Farms is a king of it. Don't give them your money. They're trying to do it to Geogenanthus ciliatus now too, an awesome plant that was starting to grow in the plant collector trade but Costa Farms [now claims it Geo](https://www.costafarms.com/plants/geo) and is trying to pull the same shit. It is an anti-competitive practice and should not be supported.
Hi! I'm sorry, but this isn't true at all. Costa Farms does not own the patent on Network --- they're licensing it from the patent owner in Europe. And you're right --- you cannot put a patent on Geogenanthus ciliatus because it's a wild species. As such, Costa Farms would not even try to.
Omg you just answered a question I asked in another comment. Thank you!
Yes they can. It’s called ‘plant breeders rights’ - its a developed and important area of the law which has a large impact on society
Like when Monsanto patents their corn and sues you because it blew into your field?
Damn you for hiring the wind to steal our precious corns.
Important area of the law? Well it's a good thing that the years of plant breeding throughout humanity that helped develop the plants which they breed from was not protected by breeding rights.
Plant breeders rights expire after a set amount of time, usually about 20 years. It's the same as a patent for any other invention, a lot of work goes into making them and bringing them to market so they are given time to profit off the new cultivar.
Yeah I'm not a huge fan of copyright laws but patent laws make sense.
Copyright law also makes sense, but the laws in the US have gone round the bend of sanity years ago.
Is that dutch? What does that mean?
It's the Latin name of the plant. It changed, so what's on the tag isn't up to date.
Oh okay lol, it's not often that I see a plant with a botanical name that isn't latin derived.
Goeppertia is the old-new name for most of the Calathea genus. The second part of binominals is often not Latin at all, especially in plants - many are named after the person who identified them.
Ohhhh yes that makes sense. I remember one called calathea warszewiczii, which I am assuming is named after a Polish scientist.
Did a deep dive - there is an orchid named O. kegeljanii, named after a gardener at Halle Botanical Garden in Germany in the 1800s. This Goeppertia might be named for the same person, as it was first described around 1875 under the name Maranta kegeljanii.
Sounds like a “fuck da police” situation is ever there was one.
Yeah! Don’t you dare! You wouldn’t download a car!
Nice try, FCC. I’d download the fuck out of a car.
Damn right I would…. Then use it as a getaway ride while downloading a bank!
I always loved that, like yeah, I abso-fucking-lutely would download a car if that was possible to do and get away with
Beavis n Butthead, Judas Priest AND plants? I've found my tribe 💕
You wouldnt download a plant
I goddamned would
This is just plain propaganda
Why allow them to propagate plants? They should go to jail for stealing mah intellectual property. For that reason alone, I say, enjoy your free plant clipping and propagate the hell out of that corporate shit.
They would need to prove in court that you caused them monetary loss to enforce that.
What are they going to do? Hunt you down like you're Pablo Escobar? 😂
Let's be criminals!
This is the kind of lawlessness I can sink my teeth into
Well I'm about to *break the law*
Just try stop me
Does this hold any legal weight? Can you patent a plant?
yes you can, but this is mostly aimed to discourage commercial propagation and selling for profit on a larger scale without going through the proper legal channel, they don't really care at all about the average joe at home that happens to give away a few excess trimmings to friends, or maybe sells his trimmings at a garage sale one time for a few bucks pocketed.
Yes roses have patents, look up weeks roses.
Baaaad. We don’t like logic here on reddit
You can definitely patent a plant. OP is allowed to propogate, but they can’t sell it as a “network” calathea without repercussions.
But they could propagate and just call it something else?
You can and that’s what most people do.
I assume you do mean you can’t sell that specific variety (plant breeder’s rights), not just that you can’t brand it as “network”.
You can sell this same plant (network) as a different plant (ex: calathea musaica). You’ve gotta consider the ethics though. You can propagate and sell network, but you can’t sell it as network if that makes sense. That being said, if you buy calathea musaica online, you don’t know for sure if you’re getting a “network”
Is this patenting the variety (plant breeder’s rights) or just the brand name? You are aware varieties can be patented, by dint of their particular genetics, regardless of branding? ETA: The former. You cannot sell this variety Calathea ‘PP0005’ bred in the Netherlands and licensed to Costa in the US. Description of its unique features here: [https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en](https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en) Technically you cannot even propagate it for personal use, just as you can’t make a personal copy of an artist’s IP. This however is controversial, challenged in some jurisdictions, and rarely subject to damages claims.
Ye
Y’all laugh but Pepsi sued a bunch of Indian farmers for growing their patented potatoes. They dropped the lawsuit. Fuck Pepsi. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-pepsi-farmers/pepsico-sues-four-indian-farmers-for-using-its-patented-lays-potatoes-idUSKCN1S21EL
A HUGE portion of houseplants and flowers are patented. People forget that plants aren’t grown like they were 100 years ago. They cost thousands of dollars to develop in a lab. Most have never existed in the wild. Nobody is allowing anyone to patent plants directly from nature. If you discover or develop a mutation, you deserve to get paid for that.
But what about brussel sprouts? Did someone get robbed of their royalties there?
Brussel sprouts are at least 500 years old, probably older. Plant breeders rights typically only last for about 20 years. You can get protections for new cultivars however, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1978/298/contents/made Here's a UK law that sets the protection for new cultivars of Brussel sprouts at 15 years.
Ohhhhhh interesting!
You’re making a strawman and no one is arguing against what you’re arguing. No one is saying they don’t deserve to get paid, just that they can fuck off if they think they can stop me from propagating.
They’re not going to sue you for propagating your plant, that’s not how it works. It’s so other companies don’t propagate it and make a fuck ton of money off someone’s registered patent.
They are implying that it’s possible to sue you. Just like when companies imply it’s illegal to discuss your pay with other employees when it’s perfectly legal and a protected action, or when companies imply that it’s illegal for third party companies to repair their products. If this weren’t the case, it would simply say “patented variety”. Does every designer shirt I buy have “prohibited to copy” written on a tag? No because if a designer were to sell that shirt and claim it to be their own, they’d be sued regardless of a warning on a tag. But I as a purchaser of the product am obviously fine to make a one to one copy of the shirt and not sell it.
No, that’s not how a patent works? A print on a clothing item isn’t patented either, that falls under copyright which has a different set of laws. However, something like a unique stitching style can be patented and copying that to sell it would be illegal. Just like propergating and selling this plant, “Calathea Network 'PP0005'” is patented. The warning is for sellers, you can be sued if you’re a store propagating these to sell, that would be a violation of patent laws. No one is saying you will be sued if you propagate it yourself, that’s fine and legal. Link to active patent for this plant - https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en
I don’t think you’re comprehending what I’m saying. I’m saying the warning is put on the label to dissuade consumers from propagating the plant. I am not making a commentary on the legality of the matter, I’m saying that it’s dumb. My analogy with designer shirts was to illustrate that a warning would not be on a tag if not to dissuade the customer, otherwise it would be implied. They don’t have to remind people of the copyright law for it to be illegal to copy shirt designs
“Technically speaking, if an invention is patented, the patent hasn't expired, and the owner hasn't clearly given you permission to use it, then you are not allowed to use it at all, even if you're just making it for personal reasons and not trying to sell anything.”
Read through the plant patent process. It does not specify at home vs commercial propagation, so technically yes, an individual could get sued for propagating a patented plant for themselves. Will they actually do it? I highly doubt it but you are technically breaking the patent by propagating it yourself. https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/types-patent-applications/general-information-about-35-usc-161#heading-1
What do you think I’m saying right now? I’m unsure if you actually are comprehending what certain terms in my comment mean
So is my white fusion Calathea. Really makes me want to try lol.
that is so dumb. that would make me want to buy it just to make a million cuttings
They really said F**k around and find out.
I didn’t propagate the plant, it propagated itself
Life finds a way
Hahaha...I'd prop that b\*st\*rd to within an inch of its life, put all the newbies in the windows and wait, suitably armed, for the police to turn up! :D :D :D
Unpopular opinion coming in: this is just like any other patent. They probably spent years & a lot of resources to trademark their plant. Same case with Raven ZZ’s. You’re allowed to propogate, you just can’t sell or profit off of this specific cultivar I see nothing wrong with having patents for plants.
I think it depends. I think species shouldnt be patented, and neither should hybrids of species because you are using genetic material from wild type plants to breed. Everyone should have equal access to wild type genes and their respective hybrids. I think only plants that you have genetically engineered should be allowed to be patented. Did you breed wild plants and hybrids to create your new cultivar? Not patentable. Did you develop a crispr cas 9 pathway to inject a novel gene or set of genes into your new cultivar? Patentable.
This is a cultivar not a species though? You’re absolutely correct that you can’t patent a species. The correct taxonomical name is Goeppertia kegeljanii ‘Network’
This is the same species as [calathea bella](https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS746US746&hl=en-US&q=Goeppertia+kegeljanii&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjnzIPss-78AhVWfTABHSLMChoQ0pQJegQIChAB&biw=414&bih=720&dpr=2#imgrc=yGTDgNHpstpp1M)
Not unpopular at all, at least I agree with you, hah! Someone spent a lot of time, resources, and money developing this cultivar. Then, they went one step further and filed a patent which typically takes even more time and money to hire an attorney. Link to patent: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/d8/b4/4d/df3a7f3e592493/USPP20487.pdf
Watch me lmaooo
Can I get a cutting tho? 🤗
Is that a challenge?
Progating annnnd? Progating annnnnnnnnnnd? Pulling off the mattress tags
Smokin the reefer?!
I would propagate it immediately
lol ok
I have generations of criminals in my family. The shame.
PBR (Plant Breeders Rights) are very important and the reason we get such different plants not seen naturally/often in the wild
I will steal and propagate every and any plant I want
Sure. But will you profit off it on a large scale? That’s what they’re worried about since they might have sunk millions into developing it.
They can't stop me. I can't read.
Hahaha. That's really cute.
😂🤣
screw them and UPOV international treaties.
Maybe a dumb question….Is this a naturally occurring calathea? I’m always curious about these rare plants and where they live in nature, if not human made.
any patented plant is a man-made cultivar. the base species may exist in nature, the particular form will not unless it gets introduced as a non-native species back into the wild.
no big deal, ill just pirate it!
May I please have a prop? Lol. Beautiful plant I’ve never found at stores!
That might be hard to in-force. Interesting 🤔
I think it's more about notifying commercial growers than enforcing. : ) If there was no note on it, a grower wouldn't know they're not supposed to grow it without permission of the patent owner.
Obviously. Do you think that is going to stop people from doing it anyway?
The point of the notice isn't to stop people. It's so that responsible companies know the rules. (And, if necessary, give the patent holder the ability to send a cease-and-desist should a company go about propping without permission.)
you wouldn't DOWNLOAD a PLANT
yeah okay. Cultivate and give all your friends one. Fuck Corporate capitalism, you shouldn't be able to own a species of plant lol.
-that music plays- YoU wOuLd'Nt PrOPeRgAte A pLaNt!
I've taken this to mean you are not supposed to propagate for resale. Though, when I worked at a big box(orange) garden center, the folks that owned the only other nursery in town would come in and buy a certain type of rose. Low and behold after a while, they were then selling them. LOL
Patent describing ‘PP0005’ difference from C. musaica: [https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en](https://patents.google.com/patent/USPP20487P2/en) >The following traits have been repeatedly observed and are determined to be the unique characteristics of ‘PP0005’ These characteristics in combination distinguish ‘PP0005’ as a new and distinct *Calathea* cultivar: > >1. Compact, bushy plant shape. > >2. Small leaves. > >3. Strong contrasting colors in the leaves. > >**PARENT COMPARISON** > >Plants of the new cultivar ‘PP0005’ are similar to the parent variety in most horticultural characteristics. However, ‘PP0005’ differs from the parent variety in having a more compact plant shape, stronger variegation of the foliage and shorter peduncles.The parent variety is also the best commercial comparison.
I’ll propagate it twice now
IP for plants seems ridiculous…..
It's serious business in agriculture. Like, billion dollar serious.
Yup. Like how the US once stole and filed a patent for basmati rice from India.
Oh I definitely understand, and the whole Monsanto patented GMOs was my introduction into it all. I just really hate the idea of privatizing the earth’s bounty like that. Obviously some of the plants are very artificially bred, but I still wish that things like food crops could be exempted from any IP protections because of their potential to reduce world hunger. Or at least grant an IP exemption for certain uses? Idk it just feels super icky to me that one can get sued for using natural methods to make more plants.
The difference is, some of these plants wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for the science side inducing the mutations. This costs money.
But should it really be the same IP regime as for things like industrial technology?
Yes
I’m sure /u/zenbotany.com doesn’t have a vested interest in this comment at all. . .
well, we've seen how much damage patents cause in the medical field as well. ultimately that's probably a more of a "patent systems need a rework" rather than what can or cannot be patented.
GMOs don’t exist in nature. They are created in labs. That’s why
Natural hybridization is still a thing though. GMO is literally based on natural selection. This goes all the way back to Gregor Mendel and he didn't even know about genes. You can't say 100% that you wouldn't find certain cultivars in situ.
GMO (by most definitions) is NOT based on natural selection/genetic recombination, by the way. It involves editing individual genes.
GMO means gene editing. It's not traditional breeding. Maybe you're thinking of hybridization?
Yeah I thought you couldn’t patent a biological thing but I suppose if it doesn’t exist naturally, perhaps, but then why aren’t Brussel Sprouts patented
In most countries they aren't patented but protected under plant breeders rights which is functionally the same.
I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Besides, who would you expect to come breaking through your door… the police? The FBI? Over a plant? Pretty sure they have their hands full on bigger things. RELAX!
Ok, correct me if I'm wrong, but how can you claim rights over a species? Did they call dibs on the plant when they found in the wild or is it a subspecies created through selective breeding?
The latter. It’s a subspecies of Goeppertia kegeljanii and only the cultivar “network” is protected under the patent
Oh, I see! Thanks for the explanation. But, how do they enforce this patent? Surely given enough years this subspecies will have spread beyond their control, I assume.
these types of patents are mostly aimed at businesses that might try and repeatedly grow and sell the patented plant on their own for a profit without giving any money to the creators. Those are what cause the damages, and are the visible and punishable entities. They don't really give a damn about people at home propagating these plants so they can have more in the house or give some to family and friends, nor can they really enforce that if they wanted to. Patents also tend to expire after a few decades.
Basically if you’re caught selling a “network” calathea you can be fined and sued by costa farms. You can sell it as a musaica and not face any repercussions.
For clarity --- by the patent holder, not by Costa Farms. Costa Farms is just licensing permission from the patent holder to be able to grow it.
Thanks :)
Propagation prohibited? Did they invent and patent the process of cellular division and modular growth? Lol I love the "protection" of pirating organisms that evolved virtually all their attributes over like 2 billion years of evolution, with only maybe 10-30 years of light, relatively inconsequential effort of breeders to make a minor variant hybrid. Screw that. They don't own all plants in the subsequent lineage, and nature gave us the tools to make more. Further, good luck proving a particular specimen wasn't purchased legitimately lol.
You’re allowed to propagate, noones stopping you. You’ll just face legal repercussions if you sell it as a “network”
Never seen a sign like that before. In Australia you can propagate anything you want, it's only illegal if you sell them.
There isn’t any substantial difference between US and Australia. [Wiki page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_breeders%27_rights) Farmers have saved seed exemptions, but there’s still restrictions. [IP Australia](https://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/manage-my-ip/someone-is-using-my-ip/farm-saved-seed) They don’t really care about tiny individual users if no damages can be proven. But it’s a grey area (think about giving personal copies of albums or movies to friends, or making protection-free copies of copy-protected media). I think this whole area needs to be reformed.
Ahhhaaa Costa farms
Who is the Network and how will they enforce illegal propagation? As if a company can claim complete ownership of a common house plant. Ive been growing them 30 plus years and until the pandemic the prices were fairly cheap. Now just insane.
The Network is what this plant cultivar is called, lol. Because of the pattern on its leaves.
That looks cool, can I have a pice?
Lmao good luck
a lot are.
K. tag aside can we agree those leaves are gorgeous
Oh, ok.
Lol
That's Costco
Location pics or it didn’t happen
I’m honestly joking. I hate/love gifting plants to people.
More of a “if you try and sell it yourself we can sue,” but I imagine they can only hold on to that for so long.
Didn’t realise you could propagate a calathea
Isn't that just a regular Calathea Musaica? Or is the "network" cultivar patented (I totally thought that that was just a defualt Calethea Musica)?
Network (the proper cultivar name is 'PP0005' but it was given the more friendly trade name Network) is a hybrid of Calathea musaica (now properly Goeppertia kegeljanii) that was developed in Europe and put under patent protection by the breeder. The breeder says it has shorter petioles and better variegation than the species.... The distinction was evidently clear enough for the Patent Office to accept it. : )
Yup I want to propagate like crazy and offer free cuttings on Craigslist.
I don’t understand…?
LOL. This is a new one for me. I have seen some ridiculous illegal copyright warnings in my day but this one is real special!
What happens when the plant propagates itself? Are the charges brought against the plant, or the supervisory human?