Re: CULT: Patently Confused
From: Kenneth Walker <kenww@pacbell.net>
Iarejan@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 8/15/99 7:34:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> vincelewonski@yahoo.com writes:
>
> << If you can patent a rose, you should be able to patent
> an iris, right? >>
> Vince,
> GADZOOKS! I hope not! Can you imagine the cost of an intro when
> everyone but the hybridizer has to pay a patent fee just to sell it??? I
> really don't know about recent patent law, or how it affects plants. Heck,
> I only discovered that iris rebloom about a year ago. <g>
Rose breeders choose to patent their roses so they can charge growers fees
for doing artificial vegetive propogation of the roses, i.e grafting or rooting
cuttings.
I'm certainly not an expert on patent law but I suspect the problem with
patenting
iris is that they naturally propogate vegetively when the rhisomes divide.
Patent
law can prevent you from creating something someone else has patented, but
can't prevent you from selling something you own and once the rhisomes divide
you own multiple plants of the same cultivare. Does anyone know enough
about patents to confirm or refute my theory?
Ken Walker
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
GET WHAT YOU DESERVE! A NextCard Platinum VISA: DOUBLE Rewards points,
NO annual fee & rates as low as 9.9 percent FIXED APR.
Apply online today! http://www.onelist.com/ad/nextcard1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
