hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

CULT: RED IRISES


Well as far as patenting irises goes, none have been patented to date.  As far
a as the patenting goes it only affects the propagation and following sale
(for money) of a particular cultivar.  So in other word "giving" it away
freely amoungst friends or others is not an infringement on the patent or
breaking the law.  Also, the use of the patented plant in breeding is not
restricted to the best of my knowledge unless a patent has been placed on a
specific genetic sequence genetically engineered (placed into the genome)
artificially because it does not occur naturally in the iris genome.   And if
a specific genetic sequence were patented and placed into a patented iris it
can also be traced thru to all of it's progeny as to whether they contain the
gene or not.  Thus anyone disputing that a patented iris was used illegally
(against the patent WITHOUT THE PATENT OWNER'S PERMISSION) could easily test
the questionable plants to see if they contain the gene or not.  This is the
sole purpose of the patent.... to protect the hard work, time and money spent
by the patent owner on developing the cultivar and allow the patent owner to
be the sole producer for sale.  Others who want to purchase the cultivar FOR
SALE have to pay a royalty to the patent owner.  Granted, you could sell it at
your club auctions (yes, that would be illegal), but you better not get
caught.

As far as registering any seedling obtained, patented plant parent or not, the
parents must be known.  Anyone "breeding" iris, particularly reds or blacks,
would be silly not to know the parentage of their seedlings.  And  MOST
seedlings are of known parentage.

So to answer your question....... the patenting of an iris only has an effect
on the SALE or use of a specified, proprietary genetic sequence of a
particular variety.  You are free to SHARE as much as you like.  I would also
mention that patent only lasts a relatively short pre-determined number of
years.  Most likely long before that patent runs out someone else will have
bred better children or grandchildren from that patented plant would hopefully
have better or significantly improved qualities from the patented parent
plant.



Original message:-------------------------


I remember back in the late 70's when the first near-black came out... when
it was thought there would never be a black iris.   And now we have so many
good black irises.   Somehow, I think we'll be the same with red irises in a
few years.   I note    Dr. Dan Meckenstock has a book coming out on breeding
red irises  (AIS bulletin, pg. 126), so I'm sure with everyone who's working
on it... we'll be seeing some promising irises in the future.   What
concerns me, is the aspect of a 'patent' on an iris, what will this all mean
to us.   We all share irises so much... there are so many who cross irises,
every color imaginable, and we don't always know the parentages of every
iris cross... so who is to know in the future in an iris contains the gene
of a patented iris?   Or does it matter?    If there are twenty good reds,
all crossed with each other, who is to know what is in the red iris of the
future?
Kitty Loberg
Reg. 14

----- Original Message -----
From: "Neil A Mogensen" <neilm@charter.net>
To: "Iris-talk" <iris@hort.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 8:47 AM
Subject: RE: [iris] REF:AIS: bulletin?


> I'm usually about the last one in the nation to get the *Bulletin* and
mine
> came a couple weeks ago also.  Sounds like after the far west coast all of
> the others landed about the same time.
>
> Filardi's putting the genetics article right with Rick Ernst's update on
the
> Lycopene/red iris project with the Univ. was an intriguing juxtaposition.
>
> There's going to be (if I ever get it written) a "Third Approach to Red"
> follow up article about an approach to a red iris working from the
> anthocyanin side with gene manipulation similar to what OSU and Cooley's
are
> doing, but with a different set of enzymes.
>
> Neil Mogensen  z 7   Reg 4

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS



Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index



 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement