“Monsanto’s entire case against Vernon Bowman — as with Percy Schmeiser — is that their profits will be negatively affected if they’e not empowered to dictate what Vernon Bowman does on his own land and with his own stuff. The relief they’re requesting is that the state should therefore so empower them. This is not a case of a ‘bad’ or ‘over-broad’ or ‘improperly applied’ patent. By its very nature, ‘intellectual property’ always represents an assertion on the part of one person of ownership title to the minds, bodies and property of others.”
Related posts:
The State: Judge in its Own Cause
The Future Is Unimaginably Better than Expected
Bill Bonner: Americans pose a bigger threat to themselves
The Unbearable Truth About Infrastructure and Urban Sprawl
Behind the Bitcoin Surge: A Financial Futurist’s Perspective
Know your rights, read the Constitution
How to Be a Rogue Superpower: A Manual for the Twenty-First Century
Tyler Winklevoss: Digital Darwinism
A Measure of Our Impoverishment (Which They Hope You Haven’t Noticed)
The Enforcement Caste's War on Women
Why the Resource Supercycle Is Still Intact
Bitcoin developer: Are bitcoin thieves revealing NSA back doors?
Internet Governance Meltdown II: The Unilateral Right to Amend
Anarchy in the Aachen
The morning after: When a government destroys its currency
