|
Authored by: eric76 on Monday, February 18 2013 @ 06:51 PM EST |
In making sexually producing plants patentable, the US Supreme Court was clearly
an activist court.
Congress clearly did not intend that patents be extended to cover plants grown
from seeds at all. They considered it in 1970 and clearly devised an entirely
non-patent protection for plants involving a registration of the protect plant
variety with the Department of Agriculture when they passed the Plant Variety
Protection Act of 1970. At least part of the reason was to permit farmers to
replant seeds they had grown.
The only patents on plants that Congress has ever passed was the Plant Patents
that was specifically limited to asexually reproducing plants.
But the Supreme Court felt later decided that wasn't enough and became quite an
activist court by extending patents to cover plants in spite of the fact that
Congress had rejected that very idea in 1970.
It would be nice if the Supreme Court were to come to their senses and realize
how Unconstitutionally Activist they were when they extended patent protection
and reverse themselves entirely on that. I'm not going to hold my breath,
though.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|