Monsanto seeds and traits are used all over the world and are offered in many other brands (License & Technology Usage, n.d). Being that other companies and farmer want to purchase or plant seeds Monsanto’s technology, Monsanto created an agreement. The Monsanto Technology/Stewardship Agreement MTSA is required to purchase Monsanto patented seeds and traits (License & Technology Usage, n.d). In this case, Monsanto had asserted two of its patents that cover genetically modified soybean seeds that are resistant to herbicide (Roundup Ready seeds). Monsanto broadly licenses its Roundup Ready soybean seeds under agreements that specify that the farmer may not save any of the harvested seeds for replanting, nor may he supply them to anyone else …show more content…
Monsanto,” n.d). He then used what was left of those seeds for his second planting. And from the soybeans he used to plant his soybeans that year saved him an abundant amount of money for that year instead of continuing to purchase the original seeds. So, from that second harvest he had taken those seeds and reused them for his third harvest, and the cycle continued for eight harvests. But, he had believed that because he purchased those soybeans/seeds from a grain elevator that it was okay in doing so because there was no contract agreement from the grain elevator …show more content…
The Supreme Court suggested that it’s “no exhaustion” ruling might not apply where an article’s self-replication “occurs outside the purchaser’s control” or is “a necessary but careful step in using the item for another purpose,” citing computer software and a provision of the Copyright Act as a possible example. As explained by Justice Kagan, “We need not address here whether or how the doctrine of patent exhaustion would apply in such circumstances.” In this regard, the Supreme Court particularly noted that “Bowman was not a passive observer of his soybeans’ multiplication.” Instead, Bowman controlled the reproduction of seeds by repeated planting and harvesting. Thus, the Supreme Court suggests that a purchaser’s control over the reproduction process likely will be a key inquiry in considering the patent exhaustion doctrine as it relates to other self-replicating