The Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association (ICMSA) has reiterated calls for the four main artificial insemination (AI) stations to suspend their decision to apply intellectual property (IP) to the offspring of farmers’ cows from specific bulls.
The ICMSA said that, based on a response from the European Intellectual Property Office, it seemed highly doubtful whether the AI companies have the legal right to apply IP on farmers' animals based on conventional breeding practices.
ICMSA president Denis Drennan said these AI stations have no legal standing on this issue.
“That legal basis has not been forthcoming and it’s all just another example of that complete lack of transparency that [the] ICMSA has already had reason to note critically,” he said.
“Let’s be very clear here: the onus is squarely on the AI stations to publish their advice and to explain exactly why they believe they can impose an IP on farmers.
“It’s perfectly possible to put a system in place that respects the position of everyone and treats all parties with fairness and respect. But the behaviour and communications of the AI stations on this highly dubious IP ‘gambit’ has been shambolic and very disrespectful to their farmer customers.”
Intellectual property
In response to a query from the ICMSA on the matter, the European Intellectual Property Office helpdesk stated the following: “Under the European patent law framework, the applicability of intellectual property rights to the offspring of a bull in a cattle breeding program depends on the nature of the breeding process and compliance with Article 53(b) of the European Patent Convention (EPC). This article excludes patents on:
Animal varieties.Processes for the production of plants or animals that are "essentially biological", such as conventional breeding involving crossing and selection.Offspring derived exclusively from such processes, which are also excluded from patentability.However, an offspring may be patentable if a technical step (eg, genetic modification via CRISPR or UV-induced mutation) modifies the genome in a way that:
Goes beyond conventional breeding methods.Is not merely a tool to assist crossing or selection (eg, using sorted sperm cells for sex selection).”Meanwhile, on the European Patents Office website, its states that “a process for the production of plants or animals which is based on the sexual crossing of whole genomes and on the subsequent selection of plants or animals is excluded from patentability as being essentially biological”.
Response
Drennan added that AI stations have been “woeful and underhand” in this move and that if a farmer signs an ‘AI-IP’ contract or uses an AI-IP bull in the coming weeks, then he or she will no longer have full ownership over the progeny.
“Farmers cannot and will not accept a situation where the ‘big four’ AI companies effectively try to take control of the Irish cattle breeding sector at the expense of the farmers.
“We advise all farmers not to sign contracts, not to enter clubs, to resist new ‘terms and conditions’ and to strongly resist any attempts of these four companies to place an IP right over their animals, the legality of which claim is now hugely questionable. If you sign a contract, you are signing away your rights to your animal.”
Read more
CAFRE trial the use of Artificial Intelligence
Editorial: Breeding - AI company rights
Issues remain over new IP rights for bulls – IFA
ICBF updates sire advice and TB data
The Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association (ICMSA) has reiterated calls for the four main artificial insemination (AI) stations to suspend their decision to apply intellectual property (IP) to the offspring of farmers’ cows from specific bulls.
The ICMSA said that, based on a response from the European Intellectual Property Office, it seemed highly doubtful whether the AI companies have the legal right to apply IP on farmers' animals based on conventional breeding practices.
ICMSA president Denis Drennan said these AI stations have no legal standing on this issue.
“That legal basis has not been forthcoming and it’s all just another example of that complete lack of transparency that [the] ICMSA has already had reason to note critically,” he said.
“Let’s be very clear here: the onus is squarely on the AI stations to publish their advice and to explain exactly why they believe they can impose an IP on farmers.
“It’s perfectly possible to put a system in place that respects the position of everyone and treats all parties with fairness and respect. But the behaviour and communications of the AI stations on this highly dubious IP ‘gambit’ has been shambolic and very disrespectful to their farmer customers.”
Intellectual property
In response to a query from the ICMSA on the matter, the European Intellectual Property Office helpdesk stated the following: “Under the European patent law framework, the applicability of intellectual property rights to the offspring of a bull in a cattle breeding program depends on the nature of the breeding process and compliance with Article 53(b) of the European Patent Convention (EPC). This article excludes patents on:
Animal varieties.Processes for the production of plants or animals that are "essentially biological", such as conventional breeding involving crossing and selection.Offspring derived exclusively from such processes, which are also excluded from patentability.However, an offspring may be patentable if a technical step (eg, genetic modification via CRISPR or UV-induced mutation) modifies the genome in a way that:
Goes beyond conventional breeding methods.Is not merely a tool to assist crossing or selection (eg, using sorted sperm cells for sex selection).”Meanwhile, on the European Patents Office website, its states that “a process for the production of plants or animals which is based on the sexual crossing of whole genomes and on the subsequent selection of plants or animals is excluded from patentability as being essentially biological”.
Response
Drennan added that AI stations have been “woeful and underhand” in this move and that if a farmer signs an ‘AI-IP’ contract or uses an AI-IP bull in the coming weeks, then he or she will no longer have full ownership over the progeny.
“Farmers cannot and will not accept a situation where the ‘big four’ AI companies effectively try to take control of the Irish cattle breeding sector at the expense of the farmers.
“We advise all farmers not to sign contracts, not to enter clubs, to resist new ‘terms and conditions’ and to strongly resist any attempts of these four companies to place an IP right over their animals, the legality of which claim is now hugely questionable. If you sign a contract, you are signing away your rights to your animal.”
Read more
CAFRE trial the use of Artificial Intelligence
Editorial: Breeding - AI company rights
Issues remain over new IP rights for bulls – IFA
ICBF updates sire advice and TB data
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: