[pp.int.general] Artificial meat

[Scott Elcomb]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:55 AM, Richard Stallman <rms at gnu.org> wrote:
>      In GMO, I have
>    serious concerns about the rush to market, the excessive application
>    of "intellectual property" law and the lack of adequate, and thorough,
>    testing.
>
> I think it would be a matter of patents -- not copyrights, trademarks,
> trade secrets, plant variety monopolies, publicity rights, or
> controlled geographical terms.  Why say "intellectual property" and be
> vague, when you can say "patents" and be clear and brief?

Noted; I just don't believe that patents are the only form of law that
corporations (with vested interests in GMO) will rely on to give
weight to their claims in any given situation, context, and/or time.

Certainly, patents are central to the topic, but they - the
corporations - will use whatever form(s) or function(s) of law they
deem necessary, applicable and cost-effective (from their POV) to
obtain maximal value or to satisfy other strategic or tactical goals.

In general, I'd prefer to keep more than the patent component in view
when looking at GMO-related topics, companies & cases.

-- 
  Scott Elcomb
  @psema4 on Twitter / Identi.ca

  Atomic OS: Self Contained Microsystems
  http://code.google.com/p/atomos/

  Member of the Pirate Party of Canada
  http://www.pirateparty.ca/