- Npos_2018 - lists.testbiotech.de

nice article with no patents on seeds and the melon - sorry, only in German
by Christoph Then 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

https://www.fluter.de/patente-streitigkeiten

1 0

draft media release for next week (Deutsch / English)
by Christoph Then 16 Jun '24

16 Jun '24

no editing yet ...

2 1

Fwd: [New-gm-eur] Proposed EU ban on gene-edited crop patents prompts dispute
by Christoph Then 14 Jun '24

14 Jun '24

with Grietje from Nordic maize breeding -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- Betreff: [New-gm-eur] Proposed EU ban on gene-edited crop patents prompts dispute Datum: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 11:09:39 +0100 Von: anthony.jackson--- via New-gm-eur <new-gm-eur(a)lists.corporateeurope.org> Antwort an: anthony.jackson(a)genewatch.org An: New-gm Eur <new-gm-eur(a)lists.corporateeurope.org> Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing(a)ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour. https://www.ft.com/content/5e3cc871-1377-4c65-88e5-e9096fb4db1f Proposed EU ban on gene-edited crop patents prompts dispute Critics of plan include green activists, farmers, biotech start-ups and multinationals Nick Huber YESTERDAY A plan to deregulate gene-edited crops in Europe has become entangled in a dispute over the technicalities of intellectual property. In February, the European parliament agreed to loosen regulations by banning patents on crops produced by genetic editing. The move followed a proposal in 2023, by the European Commission, the EU’s politically-independent executive arm, to lift controls on some genetically modified crops in order to help farmers maintain yields in the face of climate change. Genetically modified crops — in which genes from a different plant species are added to a plant’s DNA — can have various benefits, including making crops more nutritious, or more resistant to pests. These crops, among them soyabean, corn and cotton, are sold around the world, including in the US and India. But the technology remains contentious, with critics disputing its alleged benefits. In the EU, prior to the deregulation plan, only one “genetically modified organism” had been authorised: an insect-resistant maize variety. In its February move, however, the European parliament decided to relax restrictions on a similar genome technology — that of “genetically edited” crops — which, under the proposed law, will be treated the same as crops grown in a conventional way. Genetically edited crops do not involve “foreign” genetic material from other species being inserted into a plant. Instead, precise changes are made to a plant’s DNA, by editing it with the equivalent of molecular ‘scissors’. The most common gene-editing technology is called Crispr: a laboratory biotechnology that uses elements naturally found in bacteria to modify the DNA of living organisms. Supporters of crop gene editing say it will strengthen Europe’s food system and make it greener, by developing plants that are more resilient to climate change and pests, have a higher yield, and require less fertiliser. Gene-edited plants are “crucial to strengthen Europe’s food security and to green our agricultural production”, said Swedish lawmaker Jessica Polfjärd, the politician leading the genome deregulation plan in Europe’s parliament, earlier this year. The European Commission proposal in 2023 said Europe was falling behind other parts of the world in gene editing and should relax restrictions on the technology to catch up, explains Andrea Williams, a partner and European patent attorney at law firm Marks & Clerk. “The European parliament was like, ‘we agree’,” she says. But there was a catch. The parliament said that cutting back restrictions and regulations would have to include banning patents on genetically edited crops. Among critics of the proposal to ban the patents are green activists, farmers, biotech start-ups, and multibillion-dollar agriculture technology companies. A key concern is that banning patents will stifle innovation because companies will no longer be able to prevent their inventions from being copied. “Farmers and biotech companies are investing in technical innovations they may not be able to protect through patents,” points out Camilla Kiørboe, a partner and Danish patent agent at law firm Potter Clarkson. “This causes legal uncertainty for companies investing in R&D in this sector as well for investors.” Kiørboe — an expert in food and agricultural technology intellectual property — acknowledges the arguments for lightening the “regulatory framework” for gene-edited crops. Current patent rules for plant breeders can be “difficult to navigate”, she admits. However, uncertainty over if, or how, the proposed patent ban will be implemented makes it “super difficult” to know how to advise clients, she says. UK biotech start-up, Resurrect Bio is already using gene editing to develop crops resistant to disease. Its co-founder, Cian Duggan, says patents are essential to protect biotech intellectual property and breakthroughs. It can take up to 10 years of research, including up to four years of field trials, to develop crops with new disease-resistant traits and bring them to market, he notes. “We develop new technologies [and] new solutions for farmers, and we license that intellectual property to the seed industry,” Duggan says. “Without a patent, we have no product.” He adds that a patent ban would also make it harder for small companies to compete against the half a dozen or so large biotech companies that dominate the industry. If the European proposal becomes law “it would encourage our board to want to move to the US”, Duggan says. Yet, even if the EU pushes ahead with its patent proposal, other small businesses in agriculture doubt whether it would achieve its intended objectives — for example, avoiding legal uncertainties. According to one such small crop business, Nordic Maize Breeding (NMb) of the Netherlands, a patent ban on gene edited crops could still leave them subject to legal action for infringements, making it “irrelevant”. Grietje Raaphorst-Travaille, co-founder of NMb, which breeds maize through conventional and organic methods, suggests that, if farmers think a patent ban on gene edited crops will give them the peace of mind, they may be disappointed. “Farmers run the risk of violating patent rights without knowing it,” she warns — and they may be sued as a result. Gene editing in agriculture will drive small businesses “even more into the trap of dependence on large companies”, Raaphorst-Travaille believes. Large biotech companies, however, are also worried. Matthias Berninger, head of public affairs, science and sustainability at Germany’s multinational pharmaceutical and biotechnology company Bayer, which supports patentable gene edited crops, says gene editing is a “very important” innovation at the “intersection of biology, chemistry and artificial intelligence”. One alternative to the European patent proposal, favoured by some patent lawyers — and Bayer — would be to allow patents for gene-edited crops but insert a clause into the law that allows small plant breeders and farmers to use materials and techniques covered by patent, without having to pay a licence fee to the patent holder. Bayer uses this principle for small vegetable breeding companies in the EU. Critics of the proposal appear less flexible, though, and say it should either be scrapped or modified to reward companies for technical breakthroughs. One source familiar with EU legislative procedures says the “best-case scenario” is for the plan to become law in the first half of 2025. _______________________________________________ New-gm-eur mailing list New-gm-eur(a)lists.corporateeurope.org http://lists.corporateeurope.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/new-gm-eur

1 0

the new backgrounder improved
by Christoph Then 13 Jun '24

13 Jun '24

please see last version. I included remarks from Axel and Dagmar - thanks a lot. also added a version with the comments from Dagmar and my answers to it (for those who are interested). now will draft media release

1 0

our backgrounder for next week - edited
by Christoph Then 12 Jun '24

12 Jun '24

dear all please see our backgrounder for next week, meant to be published on 20 June. comments still welcome. On that day, Johanna and me plan to travel to Brussels to hand over the report in public to the Commission. we also will prepare a media release. lets see how it works. Cheers Christoph PS I think there are still problems to directly answer to this list. In case, please, copy and paste the list address and re-insert. Or just send me a mail.

2 1

Interview with Grietje Raaphorst-Travaille
by Annemarie Volling - ABL 10 Jun '24

10 Jun '24

Dear all, we have published an interview with the breeder Grietje Raaphorst-Travaille from Nordic Maize breeding in the Bauernstimme (newspaper of the AbL), you all know her from the KWS patents. It is based on an interview that InfÒGM conducted with her, which we have translated, abridged and supplemented in consultation with Grietje. Here is the link to the interview (https://www.abl-ev.de/apendix/news/details/patente-behindern-innovationen) and as pdf attached. Sorry in germen Best regards Annemarie Volling Arbeitsgemeinschaft bäuerliche Landwirtschaft (AbL) e.V. Mail: <mailto:volling@abl-ev.de> volling(a)abl-ev.de

1 0

! please give feedback: should we travel to Brussels before summer break to present this new backgrounder
by Christoph Then 09 Jun '24

09 Jun '24

Dear all please see attached a new draft backgrounder, based on the research from last year (thanks to Anne-Charlotte!). It gives an overview on patent applications that mix New GE with random mutagenesis. The legal practice of the EPO is explained as well as possible solutions. additional information: I also identified many patent applications that still are based on identifying gene variants and production of plants by crossing and selection. These patent applications, if filed after July 2017, should now be rejected. our success. However insufficient. we currently have an activity going on our website to send letters to the EU Commission. we also received first answers from the Commission (random mutagenesis is regarded as patentable) but our letter requesting a meeting was not answered. we discussed to travel to Brussels to create a photo with some vegetables and to hand over of of our backgrounder directly. If we do this end of June we could reach out to the Commission, the newly elected Parliament members and the Admin Council on 27 / 28 of June. We have to prevent the Commission to run their business while ignoring our input. I recommend to do so and would be willing to travel. please give your comments and please let me know, who may ready to travel with me. Three persons standing in front of the Commission can be a nice picture, one person is not sufficient. cheers Christoph

1 0

potential conference on plant patents
by Francois Meienberg 07 Jun '24

07 Jun '24

Dear All As a follow-up to the petition we delivered to our government a while ago, we are working with our patent office on the idea of a conference - to discuss the relevant issues regarding patents on plants. The idea as it stands now, is the following: We are doing the conference back-to-back with a meeting of the Patent Law Committee at the EPO in Munich. Target date between 17 and 28 February 2025 (the date of the Patent Law Committee in February is not yet fixed), approx. 4 hours (or more?). Physical and virtual participation possible. Target audience: EPO delegates, EU and national politicians, breeders, NGOs. Our patent office will check with the EPO. We would like to have a first draft of the program by Mid-July and we see following cornerstones : Implementation/circumvention/the limits of Rule 28b (random mutagenesis, patents on gene sequences, overarching NGT/gentech patents, opportunities and limits of the disclaimer. Further possible measures at national level (freedom to operate à la Austria, simplification of cross and compulsory licences) Transparency: What Pinto can and cannot do; alternative strategies (CH proposal, discussion in the context of seed law revision in the EU) Patents and NGT: The end of the breeder's privilege? - Possibilities to limit negative effects on breeders' access, possible solutions. * If you have any ideas, wishes etc. what should be discussed, presented, etc and if you have any proposals about potential speakers please share them with me by June 10th. Thanks and best wishes François

3 3

update: report on patent applications /activity in Brussels?
by Christoph Then 07 Jun '24

07 Jun '24

Dear all I finished my analysis of patents granted and filed in 2023. besides those cases we already published (tomatoes, lettuce) I now identified more than a dozen patent applications based on random mutagenesis. In several cases, the plants existed before, but were 're-invented'. these patents could be granted by the EPO, following its recent practice on Rule 28 (2). The companies include BASF, KWS, Syngenta, Pioneer, Carlsberg and some usual suspects from the Netherlands. we could produce a short backgrounder on these cases, with some legal background (including current practice of the EPO) and hand it over to the Commission, maybe end of June and and could also approach the EU Parliament and the Administrative council. please let me know if your are interested. I could send a first draft (including tabled overview on the cases) next week. The full report is still planned to be published in September. Cheers Christoph

1 0

Conference call 22 May 2024 - Minutes
by Johanna Eckhardt 31 May '24

31 May '24

Dear all, I just sent you the minutes of our last conference call via www.proton.me <http://www.proton.me> . Kind regards, Johanna Mag. 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.x.com/NoPatentsOnSeed> www.x.com/NoPatentsOnSeed

1 0