Alert! June 1, 2007: Monsanto has acquired Delta & Pine Land, the company that patented the first Terminator technology and has greenhouse tests of Terminator seeds.
Monsanto first tried to acquire D&PL in 1998 but this takeover bid ultimately failed. Instead, in 1999, then-CEO of Monsanto Robert Shapiro, bowed to overwhelming public pressure and pledged in an open letter,“not to commercialize gene protection systems that render seed sterile.” View the letter from October 4, 1999 ( pdf) Despite this statement, Monsanto has continued to work closely with Delta & Pine Land to lobby for Terminator at United Nations meetings.
Monsanto's latest pro-Terminator position that came to light in 2003 when the International Seed Federation (ISF) released its first position paper supporting Terminator (also known as GURTs - genetic use restriction technology) that was co-authored by Roger Krueger, Seed Quality and Policy Lead, Monsanto and Harry Collins of Delta & Pine Land. The paper defends the potential benefits of genetic seed sterilization and extols the theoretical virtues of Terminator for small farmers and indigenous peoples: “The International Seed Federation (ISF) believes that GURTs have the potential to benefit farmers and others in all size, economic and geographical areas…In reality, the potential effects of the GURTs may be beneficial to small farmers and quite positive for the environment and biodiversity." View the ISF’s 2003 position paper on Terminator
Although Monsanto repeatedly insists that it does not hold patents on Terminator, Monsanto was granted one Terminator patent published under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, WO97/44465 “Method for Controlling Seed Germinator Using Soybean ACYL COA Oxidase Sequences.” The 91-page patent, published in November 1997, details the company’s research on genetic seed sterilization and offers evidence of the company’s earlier intention to apply for patents on Terminator in patent offices worldwide.
Monsanto is vigorously suing farmers in the United States and Canada for allegedly infringing patents by saving and re-planting seeds that contain Monsanto’s proprietary genes. But that approach is costly and the company is widely perceived as a corporate bully for suing its customers. For Monsanto, Terminator would be a dream-come-true because it would offer a biological means of preventing farmers from re-planting harvested seed.
If commercialized, Terminator technology would allow Monsanto to avoid messy lawsuits, high-priced lawyers and bad publicity. Genetic seed sterility would also secure a much stronger monopoly than patents since, unlike patents, there is no expiration date and no need for lawyers.
Monsanto is particularly desperate to collect royalties from those farmers in Brazil and Argentina who are currently planting GM seeds without paying the company. While Brazil and Argentina are major markets for Monsanto and the acreage of GM soy in Latin America is often cited as a mark of the corporation’s success, these acres are not translating into profits for the company. As a result, Monsanto is putting massive pressure on Latin American governments to collect taxes from farmers who are using “unauthorized” seeds.
There is little doubt that Terminator would offer Monsanto the perfect solution to its fight with farmers and governments over control and ownership of GM seeds and traits. But the role of governments is to protect farmers – not penalize them. This is precisely why governments must ban Terminator and press for a ban at the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.
View the Centre for Food Safety’s, January 2005 report detailing Monsanto’s lawsuits against farmers: Monsanto vs US Farmers
Visit Monsanto www.monsanto.com (Monsanto also has country specific websites, for example www.monsantoindia.com)