I find the objection to patents on GMO plants to be completely indefensible.

If there was ever an area where patents are justified and necessary, this is it. This is a product that in normal operation manufactures itself. Without patent protection, the farmer would buy at most one batch to seed his fields, and then never again.

Objection to patents on GMO plants is just a way to object to GMO plants themselves without coming out and saying so directly.

▲

justinclift an hour ago | parent [-]

> This is a product that in normal operation manufactures itself. Without patent protection, the farmer would buy at most one batch to seed his fields, and then never again.

Isn't that a massive societal benefit vs rent seeking though?

▲

pfdietz an hour ago | parent [-]

If we got the seeds from the GMO fairy, yes.

If we have to get the seeds from expensive R&D that wouldn't occur without patent protection, then no.

▲

justinclift an hour ago | parent [-]

> then no.

Why not?

It's literally a self replicating system. Trying to control that for rent seeking purposes seems pretty unethical.

▲

pfdietz an hour ago | parent [-]

> Why not?

(rolls eyes)

Because if no one does the R&D to create the seeds they WON'T EXIST.

I would have thought that was 100% obvious, but apparently not!

▲

justinclift 32 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Because if no one does the R&D to create the seeds they WON'T EXIST.

Sure. If no-one does the R&D.

Perhaps if rent seeking is the mechanism for getting there, then it's better off if they don't? :)

	▲	pfdietz 9 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, yes, let's imagine automated turbo communism where all inventions can be made outside the free market. Here in the real world, private firms are the source of things like this. Roundup Ready soybeans involved cooperation from multiple private firms that contributed various elements.