The HillAccount verificato

SAY IT WITH ME NOW TRADEMARKS ON NATURE IS OBSCENE

It's most likely a patent, not a trademark

turn every pepsi factory into sand

This article used the word “trademarked” to describe a patented or otherwise protected plant variety. You should correct the article, and hire editors with even a passing knowledge of the relevant law behind the lawsuits you cover. Really sloppy.

I noted that too. In areas I'm familiar with, anyone can grow a trademarked variety. But, they can't use the trademark without permission. I could grow the Pepsi potatoes, but I couldn't call them "Pepsi Potatoes".

Also, in the US, a potato can't receive a plant patent because potatoes were specifically excluded by the law. They didnt want to interfere with people's ability to feed themselves. Now, utility patents have been granted for plants here, so it gets complicated.

I think the issue here is the article writer based a story on another story from CNN, did not read any of the source materials, and used words that he didn’t understand. It’s strange to see the resulting outrage because no one has any real facts here

A giant corporation is attempting to bully small local farmers over potatoes. Pretty sure it’s alright to be outraged over that. We’re talking farms with just a few acres, it’s not like they’re seriously harming Pepsi’s profit margins.

Where are you getting this information about the size of the farms?

This is what happens when agriculture becomes completely commodified and concentrated in the hands of a few large companies.

No it’s what happens when vast economic power seeks to undermine *commodities* -that is fungible goods - and make them proprietary to extract more “value” by excluding others from the market.