b"to technology. While it is appropriate thatI honestly dont view the intellectualentering into licenses that they frankly registrant companies have their voicesproperty laws, necessarily, as being adont understand and likely will never heard, including the right to communicateproblem. I think the IP laws here in theunderstand. They just sign it because they with EPA, their economic interests do notUnited States have actually been a prettyfigure, Hey, as long as I sign this, business align with those of future trait registrantsgood facilitator of innovation, particularlycontinues and I have a product I can sell. and farmers interested in purchasingin seed and biotech traits, he says.But theyre agreeing to some very serious post-patent, traited products, he says. The primary issue is the way in whichthings that could have major implications The first commercial biotechnologythey are administered by the owners.for them down the road.event in the United States went off- When you sit down and look at some of patent in 2014. However, no substantialthese contracts, theyre very onerous. YouCalls for Changepost-patent use of biotechnology eventshave to agree to it if you want to be ableIPSA would like to see two major over-has so far emerged, Martin notes. to sell the product, but some of the provi- hauls made to the United States patent sions in these licenses almost make yourframework, namely: patent laws must be Enormous Amount of Power stomach turn, Cape says.shown to be reasonable and not perpet-Joel Cape, an Arkansas-based lawyerual, and current biotechnology traits have specializing IP protection for plants andreached the point in the industry where plant materials, agrees that patent pro- there must be the freedom to access tection on a number of first-generationsthose traits by any company without biotech traits have not resulted in genericdelay and under reasonable terms. versions in the marketplace. Cape saysInnovation is at its best when people this is largely due to the fact that germ- build on the work of others. Hybridization plasm patents appear to be deployed asA system that continues to holdof corn came into this country in the biotech trait patents are expiring, cou- 1920s. By 1940, it was 100% hybrid pled with a registration process underinnovations too closely and does notcorn. Prior to that it was varietal. Where the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, andallow outside improvement must bewould we have been if the first company Rodenticide Act that inhibits access.to commercialize hybrid corn had not As a result, traits that becomechangedallowed other people to build on top of generic are made available through Todd Martin that? Martin says.germplasm that is newly protected. TheCape adds that access to post-patent result precludes access to generic traitsgenetics and traits is vitally important and and lower-cost seed, he says. is a common feature of other agricultural There are a lot of moving parts to it.input markets. Policies and systems that There's no doubt that consolidation inenable access and production of lower-the seed industry is a major, major factor.cost seeds and traits would greatly ben-Three decades ago, there was a prolif- efit farmers and distributors, particularly eration of seed companies in the Unitedin corn-soybean-cotton markets.States. Many of those seed companies didIn his submissions to the USDA, CapeHe adds that the seed/trait sector their own breeding and developed theirnotes that contractual terms for the sale ofwould also benefit from the sorts of own genetics, and they were all boughtseed containing biotech traits often reachlegislation and policies that are employed up, Cape says.far beyond simple IP rights and imposein other agricultural markets, like the In Capes opinion, Americas IP frame- wide-ranging, intrusive, and often poorlyPackers & Stockyards Act and the work itself is not a competitive concerndefined obligations and requirements onPerishable Agricultural Commodities in relation to seeds and traits. Rather, it islicensees. Terms defining financial returnsAct. These statutes provide guardrails for the way IP rights are administered by thefor licensees are exceedingly ambigu- acceptable practices and provide rem-owners that pose challenges.ous and contingent on factors that areedies for those that are deemed unfair.In his submission, Cape notes thatunrelated to commercial performance,Despite issuing the letter to Vilsack, in the context of the first generation ofhe writes. Examples include mandatoryMartin acknowledges that it will be an biotech traits, the IP regime enabled thedisclosure of licensees customer data,uphill battle for IPSA to level the IP play-development and commercialization ofdisclosure of current and future businessing field in the United States. He says that the traits at reasonable cost. With nextplans with detailed information regardingout of 74 comments submitted to Vilsack generation traits and trait stacks, theplans for individual products (includingas part of the USDAs request, only a benefits have waned while also becom- sales projections), and disclosure of licen- handful take a position similar to IPSAs.ing more expensive. At the farm level,sees financial statements.We need other organizations to the next generation traits accomplish theI have clients that have been in thestand up and say, Hey, we are looking at much same thing as the old traitsher- business their entire career, 40 or 50 years,whats happening in the marketplace and bicide tolerance and insect resistance.and its at the point now where theyrechange is needed, he says.SWSEPTEMBER 2022SEEDWORLD.COM /5"