There is a disconnect between patent laws, which are reflective of Western Industrial and commercial theories, and Eastern philosophies. According to , there are essentially three different ways in which a body is viewed, two of which are important to this discussion: The first is the highly individualized body, and the second is the body within society. Speaking of the first, attribute Cartesian dualism—the idea that the mind and body are distinctively separated—to the “mechanistic conception” of the body that allowed biology to pursue a radically materialistic progression, whereby the importance of mind, or the individual’s place within society, is trivialized. It is out of this understanding, I argue, that Western conceptions of patent laws have taken hold, making it problematic for Eastern societies that place an emphasis on a less individualistic and mechanistic view of the body.

In India, for example, the trading of seeds between farmers was seen as a necessity for success. The view of the farmer as a member of a larger community, therefore, had social utility. They were not only sharing seeds but were also sharing knowledge. This was the practice for thousands of years before the introduction of genetically modified (GM) seeds. The threat of large multinational companies such as Monsanto asserting patents on seeds discouraged the practice of trading seeds. The view of the farmer within a community is being displaced by an individualistic world view. The ‘magic’ GM seeds are sold to farmers at exorbitant costs on the premise that these new seeds are vastly superior to the local seeds which farmers have traded amongst each other openly. When crops fail, which they often do, many farmers commit suicide because they see no way out of the debt incurred from buying pricey GM seeds.

A corollary issue worth considering is the effect on the genetic diversity of crops in the region. The important beneficial effect of seed trading is that it fosters genetic diversity of plant life in the region. The prevention of seed trading by Western patents on GM seeds is destructive to genetic diversity. Whereas before the farmer was in a healthy give-and-take relationship with the land and community, the farmer is now individualistic, soaking his lands in potentially harmful pesticides necessary for GM seeds to grow, decreasing the nutritional value within the soil, and stifling genetic diversity of crops within the region.

Western conceptions of patent laws, holding a mechanistic value to biology, enables further marginalization of the Third world, which is still suffering from the effects of imperialism. Companies are exploiting the genetic resources of the Third world to develop pharmaceutical or other products, and often rely on indigenous knowledge to do so. The Neem Tree in India, for example, has attracted patents by US companies for its antibacterial properties, known to virtually all Indians for many generations.

The first instance of the mechanistic view of biology, stemming from Cartesian Dualism, being incorporated into Western patent laws occurred with the United States Supreme Court Decision of , ushering in a new era for patents. The court ruled that a genetically altered strain of bacteria was patentable as it was not ‘naturally occurring’. In Canada, the Re Application of Abitibi Co. (1982) opened the possibility of patenting higher life forms. The Supreme Court of Canada decision in in a 5-4 split, held that the product claim (the genetically modified mouse and offspring) was not patentable, but the process claim (how to create the mouse using new genes) was patentable. Although the law has been hesitant to the outright patenting of life forms, especially higher life forms, the law nonetheless is moving in that direction. The dissenting opinion in did not agree with the majority decision that since Parliament did not legislate for the patenting of higher life forms they clearly did not intend for it to be patented at this point. The dissent argued that Parliament did not anticipate this issue, and so it should be left up to the courts to decide. In , the Court ruled that Mr. Moore was not entitled to the rights of his own spleen cells after they were removed. The University of California exploited the cells to produce valuable protein without the consent and knowledge of Mr. Moore.

The classic pro-patent argument is that it fosters innovation. When companies create plants that can help leech toxins out of the soil (phytoremediation), or microorganisms genetically altered to help clean up oil spills, it makes sense that those that created it be able to reap the rewards of their innovation. Indeed, the market for biotechnology is large. Why not alter a strain of bacteria to make it easier to clean up oil spills instead of creating machinery that may be less effective and more costly? However, activists argue that patents exploit genetic resources of the Third World, enabling corporations to assert monopolies. This drives prices of goods artificially high and out of reach of those who need it most, as well as having people pay royalties to wealthy nations for locally derived products (for more on this, click ), furthering the marginalization of susceptible people.

There is need for harmonization between patent laws with the world views of other societies, especially when Western patent theories are being transplanted there. While there is merit to the argument in support of protecting the rights of inventors, it should be recognized as being conceived from Western philosophy, and rooted in materialistic notions of the body, which may run perpendicular to the ways in which other societies operate. Failing to do so will result in a world where the patent world reduces life to simply being ‘’ and those already marginalized by developed nations will continue to be shackled by the chains of biocolonialism.

The post The Concept of Life and Neocolonialism appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Currently, India’s domestic seed market is being overshadowed by the growing stature of Multinational corporations (MNCs), mainly due to their access to international germaplasm. Despite the dominant presence of MNCs, there is still huge potential for the expansion of the hybrid seed market in India. MNCs tend to focus on the expansion of the market itself rather than advertising a particular brand of seed. They attempt to convince farmers to invest in the hybrid seed market by commissioning numerous field workers in which open-pollinated varieties predominate. These field workers organize demonstrations and field-days, which are invitations to farmers to a local farmer’s field exhibiting extraordinarily high yields of crop. Cargill, for example, employs this advocacy strategy. Other companies, such as ITC Zeneca, screen a touring short film that dramatizes competitions between villages for the best crop.

The private sector market consists of three main types of companies: those that develop, produce, and market their own hybrid varieties; companies that produce and market public sector varieties; and companies that concentrate strictly on marketing hybrid seeds. The former category is where the most growth in the private sector is occurring, and there are several legislative changes that have facilitated this, mainly the New Seed Policy (1988), which liberalized seed imports and encouraged foreign investment in the seed market, and legislation that loosened limitations on foreign equity participation, allowing foreign companies to hold controlling stakes in industrial enterprises.

Two laws were proposed in 2004, which has been seen as a threat to biodiversity and farmers rights. Traditionally seeds were saved by farmers, year after year, allowing the farmer to adapt his crop to the changing conditions. These indigenous varieties were traded between farmers, and allowed for a healthy biodiversity. Currently eighty percent of all seeds in India are still saved by farmers. There are thousands of evolved varieties of pulses, millets, oilseeds, rice, wheat, and vegetables. The Seed Act requires that any planted variety of seed be licenced. This pushes farmers into dependency on corporate monopolies of patented seed, which was made possible by the Patent Amendment Acts which introduced seed patents.

The Indian Patent Act (1970) excluded agricultural techniques and plants from patentability. Two recent amendments, however, has allowed for the patenting of GM seeds. One removed ‘plants’ from a section of the Act, allowing a method or process modification of a plant to count as an invention and thus be subject to patentability. The other amendment prevents the patentability of “essentially biological” plant varieties. GM plants, however, are not technically considered “essentially biological”, which allows for Multinational corporations to assert their patents through this ‘loophole’.

In effect, India has been adopting a MNC-friendly and patent-liberal posture that is not only compelling farmers to engage in the private seed sector thereby rapidly destroying the public sector, it is damaging the farmer’s right to openly develop and maintain varieties in a way that his family has done just a generation ago.

Primary Source: Seeds of Suicide, The Ecological and Human Costs of Seed Monopolies and Globalisation of Agriculture, by Dr. Vandana Shiva and Kunwar Jalees, 2006.

The post The Dominance of the Private Seed Sector and the Legislative Destruction of Farmers' Rights appeared first on IPOsgoode.

The Human Rights Law Network (where I am summer interning) utilizes public interest litigation (PIL) as their primary weapon to fight for human rights. The People's Patent Group, under the umbrella of HRLN, is not a priority, however, as HRLN seems to have their hands full at the moment with securing maternal rights, rights for HIV/AIDS positive people, dalit rights, and right to food and healthcare, to name a few initiatives. As a result, issues involving GM seeds are not actively fought. As a matter of fact, I have not met a single person working for the People’s Patent Group, aside from Nigel D’Souza, my colleague-intern from Osgoode. HRLN therefore expects the interns to devise their own research proposal and submit a deliverable that will (hopefully) be useful to HRLN in furthering a PIL.

My area of interest was GM seed patents and the social, economic, and legal issues created by such patents. To focus on a project that would be useful to HRLN, I began by reading and analyzing a PIL on the biosafety of GMOs that was filed in the Supreme Court of India in 2005. Several issues came to light in this petition. Firstly, I noticed that very little scientific background was provided. As the name implies, GMOs are genetically altered organisms that are engineered to enhance a certain genetic trait (or to suppress a trait). For thousands of years, traditional farmers have been ‘genetically manipulating’ their seeds without actually knowing it, by planting certain seeds and discarding others. The process of freely trading and planting seeds with other farmers has allowed for a genetic diversity that provides the farmer with the benefit of a strong crop.

Today, companies like Monsanto are able to modify the genes of seed varieties in a way that is much less subtle than the traditional farmers freely trading and planting seeds over generations. Without any scientific explanation, the PIL stated that these GM seeds are deemed hazardous to the environment and to people by scientists across the board (neither does the PIL source their information or name scientists...). Furthermore, the PIL seemed to confuse or blur the issue by stating that the GM safety standards, although good, are not properly applied and many GM products that would otherwise fail are deemed safe to eat (this argument seems to imply that if GM safety standards are applied adequately, then GM seeds would be safe to eat?).

Thus, my experience at HRLN in my first few weeks made me aware of the following: First, that the PPG is virtually nonexistent at the moment and that my research needs to be useful to the PPG in initiating a future PIL; and secondly, that any information in a PIL needs to be sourced; and third, that it is important to separate and compartmentalize the legal issues for simplicity sake. After discussing with Colin Gonsalves, the head advocate at HRLN, I decided that my goal with the PPG will be to produce a short internal document that will serve to educate the lawyers (briefly) on the issues surrounding GMOs as well as emphasizing the need to adequately source and provide the legal issues at hand when filing a PIL. The hope from my end is that my work here will be useful, if even in a small way, in creating a PIL in the near future.

The post Public Interest Litigation to Prevent GM Seeds in India appeared first on IPOsgoode.

When I first arrived, I was immediately informed about a conference on the current issue concerning indigenous vaccine production. There is a case pending in which the government of India has shut down three plants producing indigenous vaccines, and handed out contracts to the private sector. According to the petition I read by HRLN, some of these plants are responsible for producing, for example, yellow fever vaccines—the only production facility for yellow fever in the Southeast. The government has been accused of orchestrating the shutdown on the pretext that the vaccine plants are not up to health standards. Furthermore, the PIL asserts that the government then appointed members to the board of the three plants, who then had the plants shut down, and allowed for the government to hand out private contracts. The PIL also asserts that many of the government officials involved have shares in private companies that will be receiving the contracts. What adds to the suspicion is that bringing the three plants up to a standard would cost the government significantly less than buying private sector vaccines. Unfortunately, it is the children that will suffer. Vaccines produced by the public sector units cost only Rs. 30 (less than $1) to vaccinate a child with all six essential vaccines for all of the required number of doses. The private sector, with their drug patents and more expensive combination vaccines (that are not considered essential by many experts) are threatening to increase the prices of vaccines they supply to the government. With 25million children born annually in India, huge profits can accrue to private companies who manage to get contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars to sell their vaccines to the government of India (private sector vaccines can be 2 to 20 times more expensive than indigenous vaccines). The PIL asks the court for an order to reopen the plants and for the creation of a commission of experts to investigate the matter. The case is in the Supreme Court of India.

My focus, however, will be the relation between patents on genetically modified (GM) seeds with India’s food security and the pandemic of farmer suicides. Without making my initial blog too long, I want to introduce this issue, because I will be researching this topic for the weeks to come. Briefly: Farmers are being sold ‘magic’ seeds that they are told do not require expensive pesticides. These seeds, sold primarily by Monsanto, contain terminator genes, which prevent the plants from producing viable seeds. The farmers are therefore required to purchase these expensive seeds year after year. When crop failures occur (which they do often), farmers are faced with insurmountable debt and, seeing no way out, take their own lives. There are also commentaries that these GM seeds are threatening the food security of India (but to tell you the truth, I am so far not convinced by the arguments), but more about that next time!

The post Likely Corruption in the Indian Health Care System appeared first on IPOsgoode.