Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday May 04 2019, @09:31AM   Printer-friendly
from the not-small-potatoes dept.

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.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:40AM (2 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:40AM (#839061) Journal

    Read the article. The article specifies the Indian law that these farmers under discussion relied on.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:06PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:06PM (#839218)

    Which is different than Iraqi law...

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:58PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:58PM (#839235) Journal

      I used Iraq as an example of unethical conduct of corporations. The Iraqis were in full compliance with Iraqi law, just as these farmers in India are in compliance with Indian law. American corporations don't like local law, so they try to impose US law on the locals. EU corporations sometimes do the same, but they aren't as bad as US corporations. I'm not sure how Bayer is going to be with the "rights" they got from Monsanto - they may or may not be as overbearing as Monsanto was.