SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for ErnestTBass
Potato farmers cry foul as PepsiCo sues them
Just days after multi-billion dollar conglomerate PepsiCo sued four Gujarati farmers, asking them to pay ₹1.05 crore each as damages for 'infringing its rights' by growing the potato variety used in its Lays chips, farmers groups have launched a campaign calling for government intervention.
The case is coming up for hearing in an Ahmedabad court on Friday.
Warning that the case could set a precedent for other crops, farmers groups are pointing out that the law allows them to grow and sell any variety of crop or even seed as long as they don't sell branded seed of registered varieties.
The farmers want the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Authority (PPV&FRA) to make a submission in court on their behalf and fund legal costs through the National Gene Fund.
When asked for a response, a PepsiCo India spokesperson said: "Given the issue is sub judice, it would not be proper to offer detailed comments."
T.K. Nagarathna, the PPV&FRA registrar who has jurisdiction for vegetable crops, said that the case had come to the notice of the Authority and it was looking into it. "We can take action based on the court order," she told The Hindu.
"These farmers are small, holding around 3-4 acres on an average, and had grown a potato crop from farm-saved seed after they accessed the potato seed locally in 2018," according to a letter sent to the PPV&FRA by farmers groups. They alleged that PepsiCo hired a private detective agency to pose as potential buyers and take secret video footage, and collect samples from farmers' fields without disclosing its real intent. PepsiCo then filed suit, the letter said. It added that at least nine farmers in three districts have been charged since 2018.
(Score: 3, Informative) by CZB on Saturday May 04 2019, @02:32PM (11 children)
The industry standard solution is the US is "don't even sell your specialty seed to farmers you don't trust." That would be profitable farmers who have a history of doing excellent work and respect legal contracts. Subsistence farmers desperate for cash aren't eligible.
I'm planting one field with a tortilla wheat variety. If the crop passes quality tests, it will be bought as seed wheat for farmers next year, worth twice the market price. I would choose to go bankrupt instead of cheating the system. Growing food is ... well its sacred. But I can see how some folks would be unconcerned with contract law. And the buyer has just as much need to protect the integrity of their product.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday May 04 2019, @03:26PM (3 children)
I agree, it's a cultural problem. But, the problem is our culture, not India's, in this case. Developing and selling a "specialty seed" doesn't give you some kind of right in the product grown from those seed. You sold the seed, you got your money, don't look for more.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Bot on Saturday May 04 2019, @10:20PM (2 children)
> I agree, it's a cultural problem.
Given the etymology of culture, you can say that aloud.
I don't care about the technicalities. What we have here is a corporation suing for intellectual property, which is the whole point of GMO: Control.
Now they did retire the lawsuit? Does not matter. I am not going to let them pull those things with my money, so PepsiCo gets in my personal blacklist.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Tuesday May 07 2019, @04:15AM (1 child)
We need a real breakup of all these global corporations. If it's not possible to do business without approval of $x then more breakups are needed.
Pepsico? No worse than any other global megacorp that does business in China.
Go ahead, try to boycott them all, tomorrow. I'll be impressed if you make an honest 3 days.
If this was simply a matter them doing a better job for less money, I'd give them a standing applause and try to negotiate an honorable peace.
But it isn't. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any free market. It's the result of decades of corrupt policies favoring Chinese manufacturing (and Mexican labor.)
The stables need cleaned and the Potomac provides nowhere near sufficient water.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by Bot on Friday May 10 2019, @08:10AM
It's a good point but they boycott is a matter of principle only. I am convinced that boycotts are completely irrelevant, as the money printed by the bank is indistinguishable from the hard earned money of the little, and medium guys, and the money extorted with some unholy deals with politicians by the big guys.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Saturday May 04 2019, @04:16PM (2 children)
I absolutely agree- growing food is sacred. My immediate reaction to the story is the Gestapo tactics of the big company (they don't need any more press.) Slowly but very surely the world is becoming a police state. Instead of the secrecy / baiting / entrapment, they could have approached the farmers and negotiated a deal. Do we even know if the farmers knew they were breaking rules / laws?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 04 2019, @06:10PM
farmers need to start killing every rep these big companies send out. make it very expensive for these pieces of shit to screw with people.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday May 05 2019, @01:27PM
Yes, it is. It is accelerating now, though, with the efforts to de-platform, de-person, sue, censor, shame, de-fund, excommunicate, and ostracize. Does that mean greater freedom is very near, and the masters are in a panic to forestall it? What do we call our global human inner call to freedom and self-determination? The old labels, the twentieth century and nineteenth century ones, don't fit anymore. That antidotes we have now are only named in part, like "the right to repair" or "DIY" or "organic farming" or "open source software."
There's no overarching term that leaps to mind.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday May 04 2019, @10:01PM (3 children)
Feeding your family is sacred. If you would rather fail in that duty than violate a questionable contract, what does that say?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday May 05 2019, @01:15AM (2 children)
Meh. In the U.S. this all died out in 1942 with Wickard v. Filburn, where the Supreme Court ruled that even growing your own food to be used for your own family and animals on your own land was "interstate commerce" and thus the government could fine you if you grew too much for its liking.
I don't know about India, but in the U.S. we gave up our right to grow food to feed our families without government intervention a few generations ago. Now we're quibbling about contract law.
(Score: 2) by CZB on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:59PM (1 child)
The state may have given itself the authority to do whatever it wants, but practically there aren't many restrictions to be found in growing your own food, or even selling it in the US. Whenever there is some agricultural disagreement that makes the news, at that stage everyone has rounded up the legal precedents that support their position. But the base disagreements are always "hey we had a deal", "your stuff is affecting my stuff" or "you aren't in the club, join or stop competing".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 05 2019, @05:24PM
have you seen farmageddon?