what is needed here is more information from more sources to discuss more of the greater implications of how not only the patents but the crops themselves may impact natural evolutionary processes, and costs including financial and environmental and health in world populations in the future. survival for humans and the natural world will be affected, but it seems impossible to predict how., with or without patents.

Nothing in the world prevents private individuals from doing the research and giving it away and thus preventing patenting. If private companies do the research they expect to make a profit which encourages more research. Which was exactly the purpose of patent law. Had the companies not done the research we would be worse off than we are with the companies patenting the research results. After all the results will come off patent eventually and any one will have access. In the mean time there is charity. It always amazes me that as soon as the profit system produces extraordinary results the thieves are out in force.

The article gives competing views on big corporations patenting nature in order to profit from famine. The proper role of governments and the rights of people are talked about, but perhaps too sketchy for full coverage of this issue.

Although privatization of seeds for food crops is nothing new (I'm not a farmer or even an activist in the area, yet I've known about it for some ten or fifteen years), it's an important story that has to get out. The story offers a new twist on the problem--climate change--and it gives some hard figures to back up its point.

This story has global implications on the food crisis: It seems to be clearer than ever that this crisis is man-made and has more to do with man made laws and regulations. Laws ought to be changed to serve mankind not the other way around : patents should not be granted if there is a possibility that in future it can destroy food security, patent should be granted only on the explicit understanding that if granting of a patent has hurt even one man then it would stand revoked. Even better would be to exclude food from patentable items.

Not only good journalism but militant journalism. Patenting could be "very important" for making money but there is no room for it when it comes to address the food problem of the world. Monsanto and others in the business of GM crops do not solve the problem just compound it by basically "enslaving" the farmers if there politics succeed. Never mind destroying the all ready existent bank of seeds developed by mother nature and farmers along thousands of year. Never mind the unknown effect of GM crops on people and environment. Mind only the PROFIT. We all should reject the current policies and interests of companies like Monsanto. This is not to say that we should reject in totality the research done until now, just actively ... More »

Pure unadulterated rubbish, poorly written.

This is good journalism The mear fact that it is reported. However i must say ..."will the market place ever get.......... that the same GREED that allows ownership of all (PATENT) to a few thus allows/demands.......... the toto missuse/abuse of all,THIS ATTITUDE OF MINE-MINE- MINE............... created the problem in the 1st place " "the perpertrators will 0/never become ...ths heros" doing the same old "BUSINESS AS USUAL"