What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Nepenthes copyright infringement?

I've been wondering, hypotheically of course. If some amateur was to setup a TC lab and begin cloning Nepenthes. But they weren't using plants they discovered or their own clones. Would they be violating a copyright by cloning some plant in their collection that was originally cloned by someone else?

Also, say someone was to begin hybridizing and created some plant and marketed it only to find out later the same cross had been available and registered. Are there grounds for copyright infringement in either case?

What made me think was an Anthurium I saw last weekend who's tag said "plant copyrighted propagation prohibited".
 
It's serious business. Just ask any Rose breeder/wholesaler or retailer. Royalties must be paid. Illegal propagation can result in fines and lawsuits.
This doesn't exist with Nepenthes, because TC of Neps starts at the seed. Mericloning has not been perfected or put into practical use...yet.
As an example: B.E. has several TC clones of N. rafflesiana gigantea. Notice they are numbered, 99, 97, 154 etc. Rob and John put a lot of seed into TC, raised up the plantlets to ascertain how they'll look, and decided to go with these selected "clones". It's a lot of time, money and hard work to reach the point where you're ready to go to market. No one else can produce these clones without obtaining the protocorms -the "embryos" derived from the seed that are used to make the clones.
On the otherhand, Sarracenia can be mericloned, which is why there are some cultivars that carry a patent and trademark.
Whew! I hope I helped, Josh.

Trent
Boca Raton, Florida
 
Yes that helps. What about selling cuttings from such numbered/ID'd clones?
 
I think this is getting ridiculous!!. I bet you all that there are no legal constraints regarding cloning plants. Nobody should be able to put patents or copyrights on something that mother nature creates. The only copyright owner is mother nature herself.

Imagine myself trying to clone Nepenthes jacquelinae. Would that mean that i'd be sued by Mr. Wistuba and Mr. Cantley?. How one can prove that the plant is a clone from either The nepenthes nursery or B.E? Maybe most of the Jacquelinaes do come from 2 sets of parent plants? and there are two variants: the green and red clones. No matter how many patents one attempts to impose on others, if a plant shows high genetic homology with others of the same species, there is no legal basis for copyright infringement. After all, no human had invented plants to have legal rights over them!!.
 
CPaddict,

A seed grown plant in TC (as Trent described) is a unique genetic entity. What I'm talking about is cloning/propagation of pre-existing already registered hybrids or cultivars of Nepenthes.

For an example let's take Cantley's Red, seemingly the most coveted of the available N. ampullaria clones. I don't know if this plant is registered (Rob?). If someone were able to clone it from their own plants meristem would this be breaking a copyright law since it is a cultivar?

And if so,  still there's the question of trading or selling cuttings of such cultivars/registered Nepenthes. Since this is technically propagation, though taking far longer than cloning, and in incomparable quantities. Many hobbists sell/trade plants (of all types, species, hybrids & cultivars) amongst themselves, is that considered the same sort of infringement?

Perhaps this whole subject belongs filed with my last grey area question of "how legal are our species plants and what do we have to prove to the feds as growers?" ...  
rock.gif
 
Dear Swords and Trent:

This is my favourite kind of topic. Cultivars are registered by a society so the person who discovers them takes the credit and the recognition they deserve, but does that mean they own the plant? so anybody who buys it, it is just buying the right to have one not the right to do anything one want to with it??. This is prepostrous!!. well, there is no law forbiding anyone to sell a plant even if they are not the ones who discovered it!!. Please correct me if i am wrong, well anybody! let me see the light!

Gus
 
I remember buying a pot of miniature roses and it said:"this plant can not be propagated in any way matter or form" I think this is rediculous as they didn`t produce the genetic code that made that plant....;GOD did. That`s like the people patenting peoplkes genes it`s completely ludicrous and imo would not be wrong to violate these laws. I do however think you should give credit to the hybridizer,as he\she most likely did go through a lot of trouble to hybridize and nurture the plant.


Just my opinion.
Noah.
 
Besides they are trying to take away the plants God-given right to reproduce!
 
Swords are you related to dean cook?
rock.gif
 
  • #10
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Swords are you related to dean cook?

Only in my love for growing Nepenthes!

Well, a bit of faith is always essential with making hybrids!
wink.gif
 But the way the law would see it; "god" didn't go into so and so's greenhouse cross these two plants, put out $$ for promotional advertising material, TC agar medium, potting soil, etc.

It may only be those hybrids of commercial plants (such as miniature roses, anthuriums, etc.) which have been  'patented' which have such propagation restrictions.
 
  • #11
That's right,  God, Mother nature or any extra-natural force made these pure nepenthes species. However, if a man intervenes creating an unique nep  hybrid such as those nepenthes that Geoff Mansell sells in Australia, well that may be a different story.

Gus
 
  • #12
Sorry I haven't responded sooner. Was away from computers all weekend!
Here goes. A registered cultivar is not patented. If you have a method to mericlone, as an example, N. 'Lt. Pring'- a properly registered cultivar from 1950, and now very rare in collections-and put that plant into tc- you have the legal right. As far as I know, no one has filed a patent on a Nepenthes-mainly because they have not been successfully mericloned yet.
It's a different situation with Sarracenia. They can be mericloned, and one commercial grower-hybridizer of Sarracenia has patented some of his cultivars. the names are even denoted with a trademark symbol. This means you cannot commercially propagate that cultivar without consent of the owner of the patent. It will also mean paying royalty fees. This includes even selling vegetative propagations (cuttings). It is a book keeping nightmare for commercial rose nurseries.
Now, as for N. ampullaria 'Cantley's Red': it is a cultivar, but not patented. Again, no one has successfully mericloned Nepenthes-even though I hear there's been some breakthroughs recently. All tc Nepenthes are derived from seed. The seed provides the embryo that is used to produce the protocorms (see previous post). No one can patent a species, like N. jaquellineae (pardon the mis-spelling), but say you produced a single plant from a group of seedlings of N. jaq. that has a blue peristome, then you've got a truly unique cultivar, that could be named (let's call it 'Jackie's Blues') and it could be patented, which means if anyone else propagates the plant commercially, they must have your permission, and you would probably want a percentage of the sales -a royalty.
Commercial growers put a lot of money into producing new and unique plants for the horticultural industry. It is their product, and just like any other product, the business needs to make a return on their investment, and hopefully some profit.
Hope this has been helpful.
Trent
 
  • #13
Thanks Trent,

That answers what I was curious about. Basically I was wondering what the legal difference was between registered cultivar or hybrid and patented plant.
 
  • #14
Well, after the "minor" frost damage on some ampullaria -- (Doh!, you guys tried to warn me) -- I'll be hoping for some cultivation miracles myself.  If the cuttings live I plan on growing them, not selling them.  When they take over my growing space, then... I'm dreaming.

Anyway, the wind chill you guys mentioned was a killer to the seriously lowland species.  The ventrata did not like the one plunge down to freezing for a few hours.  It was only covered with a trash bag, as it's attached to the porch.  Everything else was in plastic-covered grow racks.  Nothing really likes cold weather, nepenthes wise.  Some will tolerate it better than others.  

Since then I've added mulch to the bottoms of all the grow racks to keep out the wind totally, and hold in more moisture.  The heat from decay is helpful also.  I've moved everything in an area to maximize the daytime sunlight.  

Overall, nepenthes have proven to be fairly tough.  But, if you don't watch the weather -- even in Florida -- one day of freezing can have some scary results.  I was on vacation for a week.  When I got back someone said, "Did you see the frost the other morning?"

sad.gif


Red spots on leaves are minor windchill damage.  The pitchers dry out and die quicker.  New pitchering drops to almost nothing.  

The "blowtorch effect" you guys mentioned happend on one small albo in a 3" pot I forgot to house with the rest.  Ouch!  That night it never dropped below 45, but the wind just blackened it absolutely dead.  I've learned to be more careful.  Thanks for the tips.  It could have been much worse.  Growing outside requires some trial and error even with good information.  I managed to keep the fatal errors down.
 
Back
Top