April 2020 - Npos_2018 - lists.testbiotech.de

Response from Corteva
by Bram de Jonge 15 Apr '20

15 Apr '20

Dear All, Please find attached the fourth response we have received, this time from Corteva. This went through Oxfam US office. I think we need to take their response into account, copied from the attached: Corteva Agriscience (including our predecessor companies) is not a patent holder in the Pepper Plant example cited nor did we have any involvement in the breeding work described. We ask that the language in the example is reworded to make that clear or remove mention of Corteva in the context of this patent Now, you must have received the responses from BASF, Keygene, Rijk Zwaan and Corteva. KWS and Bayer will follow this week. From the other companies we did not receive any feedback so far. Best regards, Bram Bram de Jonge | Seed Policy Advisor Sowing Diversity=Harvesting Security (SD=HS) Program Oxfam Novib | The Hague, The Netherlands | +31 (0)70 342 1 717 skype: BramDeJonge | http://www.sdhsprogram.org/

1 0

full German version of the report (see front page and logos)
by Christoph Then 14 Apr '20

14 Apr '20

Dear all please see with front page and logos the full German version. we are still working with links to glossar, I guess we will limit it to link each just one time, not through the whole text. cheers Christoph

2 1

how to go on with phone calls and answers from companies
by Christoph Then 14 Apr '20

14 Apr '20

Dear all maybe Bram has the time to re-collect his information about the answers from companies. There was some problem with his e-mails. I think this process is highly interesting. I do not think that no patents on seeds would have been able to receive all these answers within given time frame. For me it shows, how important Oxfam is for them. Maybe I am wrong. But in conclusion I am quite happy that Bram started this process. how to go on? Bram, Johanna and me will be in phone conference with Plantum tomorrow. I saw interest from Francois to join the phone conference with KWS. I could participate on Thursday morning - Bram can you organise? I would prefer a phone conference instead video. On the report: I still have to check if we want to integrate answers to the report or if we use it for public communication in another way. We have to be careful to keep the possibility to communicate at the time and with the content as we decided, in accordance to our agenda. On the other hand, this is an interesting process, worth considering. I will try to make a proposal tomorrow after the phone call with Plantum. Cheers Christoph

1 0

Company responses OTC
by Bram de Jonge 14 Apr '20

14 Apr '20

Dear all, Last week Wednesday, I sent the first 2 company responses that I received after providing all companies the Opportunity to Comment (OTC) through our email list. Apparently, this email was not well received so I try again now. We have now received 3 responses, from Keygene, Rijk Zwaan and BASF. All three are attached. We have also been invited for a meeting with the director of Rijk Zwaan to discuss the issue in more detail once F2F meetings are possible again. In addition, I received a request from Bayer, Corteva and KWS to have some extra time to send their response due to the Eastern weekend. I have set Thursday 16 April as the final deadline so that I can forward all response to you on Friday this week. KWS also asked for a phone call this week, and proposed either 2PM on Wednesday or on Thursday morning before 11AM. Please let me know in case you would like to join this call asap. In their email they write: "There seem to be several inaccuracies and omissions of information in the except provided, but further discussion would be needed to provide a satisfactory response. Moreover, the report clearly does not reflect the KWS position." I have indicated that we are, as part of this OTC, particularly interested to hear about the 'inaccuracies' they are referring to. Altogether, I am surprised with the number of responses ( I had expected fewer responses). Some responses look interesting for us to use, i.e. Rijk Zwaan. In case we want to quote any part of a response received, we will need to inform the relevant company and ask for permission. I can do that quickly if needed. Keygene's response is also interesting but I am not sure whether we want to refer to it in any kind of way (they say they value 'open innovation', whereas we support 'open source'). Generally, it may be a good idea to indicate, e.g. in a footnote, that all patent applicants discussed in this report have been provided the Opportunity to Comment, and to mention the companies that made use of that opportunity. We can then add a small disclaimer that any mistakes in the text remain our own. I leave it the writing team to decide what information we want/need to incorporate in the report. Keygene for example mentions that ETH Zurich is co-inventor of their patent. I am not sure whether this would count as relevant (factual) information that we need to take into account. Hope this overview is helpful, and that you will receive it this time. I will keep you informed about any other feedback I receive during the course of this week. Best regards, Bram

1 1

Fwd: Company responses OTC
by Christoph Then 14 Apr '20

14 Apr '20

with all attachments -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- Betreff: Company responses OTC Datum: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 09:27:50 +0000 Von: Bram de Jonge <Bram.de.Jonge(a)oxfamnovib.nl> An: Christoph Then <christoph.then(a)testbiotech.org>, Npos_2018 <npos_2018-bounces(a)testbiotech.de> Kopie (CC): francois.meienberg(a)prospecierara.ch <francois.meienberg(a)prospecierara.ch> Dear all, Last week Wednesday, I sent the first 2 company responses that I received after providing all companies the Opportunity to Comment (OTC) through our email list. Apparently, this email was not well received so I try again now. We have now received 3 responses, from Keygene, Rijk Zwaan and BASF. All three are attached. We have also been invited for a meeting with the director of Rijk Zwaan to discuss the issue in more detail once F2F meetings are possible again. In addition, I received a request from Bayer, Corteva and KWS to have some extra time to send their response due to the Eastern weekend. I have set Thursday 16 April as the final deadline so that I can forward all response to you on Friday this week. KWS also asked for a phone call this week, and proposed either 2PM on Wednesday or on Thursday morning before 11AM. Please let me know in case you would like to join this call asap. In their email they write: "There seem to be several inaccuracies and omissions of information in the except provided, but further discussion would be needed to provide a satisfactory response. Moreover, the report clearly does not reflect the KWS position." I have indicated that we are, as part of this OTC, particularly interested to hear about the 'inaccuracies' they are referring to. Altogether, I am surprised with the number of responses ( I had expected fewer responses). Some responses look interesting for us to use, i.e. Rijk Zwaan. In case we want to quote any part of a response received, we will need to inform the relevant company and ask for permission. I can do that quickly if needed. Keygene's response is also interesting but I am not sure whether we want to refer to it in any kind of way (they say they value 'open innovation', whereas we support 'open source'). Generally, it may be a good idea to indicate, e.g. in a footnote, that all patent applicants discussed in this report have been provided the Opportunity to Comment, and to mention the companies that made use of that opportunity. We can then add a small disclaimer that any mistakes in the text remain our own. I leave it the writing team to decide what information we want/need to incorporate in the report. Keygene for example mentions that ETH Zurich is co-inventor of their patent. I am not sure whether this would count as relevant (factual) information that we need to take into account. Hope this overview is helpful, and that you will receive it this time. I will keep you informed about any other feedback I receive during the course of this week. Best regards, Bram

1 0

Re: [Npos_2018] Company responses OTC
by Christoph Then 14 Apr '20

14 Apr '20

Dear Bram, this mail was not sent to the list - was it? could you in case have a look to the correct mail address? it should read: npos_2018(a)testbiotech.de <npos_2018(a)testbiotech.de> should we try to discuss some of the issues tomorrow in another, internal phone conference? or direct call? for the phone conference with Plantum I forgot to mention that I would like to their input on your idea for joint statements / events. thanks! Christoph Am 14.04.20 um 11:27 schrieb Bram de Jonge: > Dear all, > > Last week Wednesday, I sent the first 2 company responses that I received after providing all companies the Opportunity to Comment (OTC) through our email list. Apparently, this email was not well received so I try again now. > > We have now received 3 responses, from Keygene, Rijk Zwaan and BASF. All three are attached. > We have also been invited for a meeting with the director of Rijk Zwaan to discuss the issue in more detail once F2F meetings are possible again. > In addition, I received a request from Bayer, Corteva and KWS to have some extra time to send their response due to the Eastern weekend. I have set Thursday 16 April as the final deadline so that I can forward all response to you on Friday this week. > > KWS also asked for a phone call this week, and proposed either 2PM on Wednesday or on Thursday morning before 11AM. Please let me know in case you would like to join this call asap. In their email they write: "There seem to be several inaccuracies and omissions of information in the except provided, but further discussion would be needed to provide a satisfactory response. Moreover, the report clearly does not reflect the KWS position." I have indicated that we are, as part of this OTC, particularly interested to hear about the 'inaccuracies' they are referring to. > > Altogether, I am surprised with the number of responses ( I had expected fewer responses). > Some responses look interesting for us to use, i.e. Rijk Zwaan. In case we want to quote any part of a response received, we will need to inform the relevant company and ask for permission. I can do that quickly if needed. > Keygene's response is also interesting but I am not sure whether we want to refer to it in any kind of way (they say they value 'open innovation', whereas we support 'open source'). > Generally, it may be a good idea to indicate, e.g. in a footnote, that all patent applicants discussed in this report have been provided the Opportunity to Comment, and to mention the companies that made use of that opportunity. We can then add a small disclaimer that any mistakes in the text remain our own. > I leave it the writing team to decide what information we want/need to incorporate in the report. Keygene for example mentions that ETH Zurich is co-inventor of their patent. I am not sure whether this would count as relevant (factual) information that we need to take into account. > > Hope this overview is helpful, and that you will receive it this time. > I will keep you informed about any other feedback I receive during the course of this week. > Best regards, > > Bram

1 0

Press release online
by Johanna Eckhardt no-patents-seeds.org 10 Apr '20

10 Apr '20

Dear all, today's press release is online. You can find it on our homepage <https://www.no-patents-on-seeds.org/en/node/619> . There is as well a post on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/nopatentsonseeds> and Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/nopatentsonseed> . Please share. I attached the press release and a visual you can use. Please let me know if you need other variations of the visual. Best, Johanna Johanna ECKHARDT Project Coordination Tel. +43 680 21 26 343 <mailto:johanna.eckhardt@no-patents-on-seeds.org> johanna.eckhardt(a)no-patents-on-seeds.org NO PATENTS ON SEEDS! <http://www.no-patents-on-seeds.org/> www.no-patents-on-seeds.org <http://www.facebook.com/nopatentsonseeds> www.facebook.com/nopatentsonseeds <http://www.twitter.com/nopatentsonseed> www.twitter.com/nopatentsonseed

1 0

planned media activity this week DE and EN
by Christoph Then 09 Apr '20

09 Apr '20

dear all, please see attached the draft media release on Carlsberg patent applications in German and English (with first corrections in track changes). Erling tries to organise a Danish version. I guess we should send it out before Easter, to try to be in time before the Enlarged Board of Appeal says anything. We then can use the time to spread the message (also to member states) over Easter and the week after to raise some awareness for the report - I think we will need this time. I also have to mobilise the organisations in Germany, to make sure they get aware of the upcoming political developments. We then have time to decide when we exactely will publish the report. A first layouted English version is available now and will be circulated. Cheers Christoph

5 5

first draft layouted En version of the report
by Christoph Then 08 Apr '20

08 Apr '20

Dear all please see first draft English version of the report with layout. missing: the front page, the logos the organisations, a table on research within Pinto as well as the functional glossar (links in the text). we continue to work on it. please send your final comments if needed (I still have to integrate the last comments from Bram to this version). I now will approach Salvia and FOE to inform them. cheers Christoph

1 0

draft PR on Carlsberg to be published before easter (?)
by Christoph Then 07 Apr '20

07 Apr '20

Dear all please see attached a draft PR on our report and Carlsberg which could be used to announce our report this week. We might run it before/ around easter and hope it will raise some attention on our report which could be released next week. what do you think?I will try to organize a German version asap. the first layouted version of the report can be expected very soon. Cheers Christoph

2 1