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
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
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


Here's an exert from a web page on PBR and also I've attached the British PVR
"What is Plant Breeders Rights?
Plant Breeder's Rights (PBR) is a voluntary scheme that gives the breeder of a
new variety specific commercial rights for twenty years (or longer in the case
of trees and vines). They can pertain to all plant species including fungi,
algae and transgenic varieties. As a comprehensive form of intellectual
property, PBR acknowledges human effort or innovation in much the same way as
the writing of a book is acknowledged by copyright. PBR is a specialised form
of intellectual property rights for plant varieties. It has been designed to
recognise the ownership of new varieties that have been created through a
person's intellectual efforts.

What are the Grantee's Rights?
PBR rights are focused on allowing exclusive commercial rights to a limited
number of functions:

  a.. Propagate or reproduce the variety
  b.. Condition the material for the purpose of propagation
  c.. Offer for sale or sell the variety
  d.. Import or export the variety
  e.. Stock the variety for any of the above purposes.
In some circumstances the rights can be extended to the harvest (eg cut
flowers) and its products (eg oils) if the rights holder has not had
reasonable opportunity to exercise their rights on the propagative material.
However once each plant is sold, the PBR rights on that plant are exhausted
and it can be grown on and harvested without further consideration to the

For example, a grower purchases 100 plants of a PBR protected riceflower and
plants them on his property. He can harvest and sell cut flowers from these
plants each year without infringing PBR. However, if he wished to increase the
number of plants then more plants would need to be purchased. He cannot simply
propagate the plants himself and thereby expand the area under cultivation.
Except in the situations listed below, it CANNOT be multiplied without

It's interesting that one cannot reproduce the plant for one's own commercial
purposes. A bit easier to do for roses and fruit trees than for irises (if one
was for eg selling the blooms.)

Also breeding from the plant is specifically exempted. So PVR on an iris would
only be worthwile if it was sterile because if it was a red iris my first
thought would be to breed from it.

Colleen Modra
Adelaide Hills AUST
zone 8/9


----- Original Message -----

From: "Robt R Pries" <rpries@sbcglobal.net>
To: <iris@hort.net>
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: [iris] Re: CULT: RED IRISES

> I am not a patent lawyer but my understanding of plant patent laws is a bit
different then what has been expressed. First there has been one Iris
patented. I can't remember the name but it was one done by Schreiners about 20
or 30 years ago. Because of the various restictions that a patent imposes the
Iris was not a success and they never did it again.
> I believe that their are implications that have been mis-stated. On a red
iris I am sure it will be a particular DNA segment that will be pattented. No
Iris with this segment will be allowed unless a royalty is paid to the
originator. This means that it can not be used in breeding unless a royalty is
paid for all offspring that turn up this segment. In theory you are not even
allowed to propagate the original palnt in your garden. I say in theory
because no one enforces this unless there is a significant financial loss.
> The fact is that a patented Iris would have to be treated very differently
than what individuals and clubs do now. Sharing would not be legal, although
who would moniter this. I do believe we should support the idea that some
plants be patented. If not, no one will bother to make the investment in
producing truly new plants in the future. With todays micropropagation
techniques it is possible to distribute millions of patented roses across the
USA and their price becomes reasonable. Patented plants will change the way
buisiness is done but that is the price of entering a new world.
> Linda Mann <lmann@volfirst.net> wrote:
> Probably true that seedlings are of known parentage.
> But as for parents being known for registered seedlings, not at all
> true. Some top award winners have been from unknown parentage. Even
> from the most respected hybridizers occasionally lose track of where
> some of their best seedlings came from.
> Not to mention those who don't keep good records or guess at parents and
> claim guesses as fact.
> not, the
> parents must be known. ...... And MOST
> seedlings are of known parentage.>
> I wonder how expensive it would be to test.
> So if I understand what you are saying, if Neil gets a patent on a
> genetically engineered genetic sequence for red genes in iris, gives me
> a start of the clone that has it, tells me I can use it for making my
> own crosses, I'm ok to do whatever I want with the seedlings.
> But if he doesn't explicitly give me permission, I can still make
> crosses using his plant, but can't sell them, until the patent expires.
> I wonder if a plant would be technically considered "introduced", thus
> elligible for awards, if it were advertised to be given away rather than
> sold.....
> 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.>
> --
> Linda Mann east Tennessee USA zone 7/8
> East Tennessee Iris Society
> American Iris Society web site
> talk archives:
> photos archives:
> online R&I
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
> message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
> message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pdf which had a name of British PVR act..pdf]

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

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

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