HN2new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This assumes he bases his judgement of Monsanto on the judges decision, which he can, but doesn't have to do.


Of course he doesn't have to. But the judge's decision does seem to be the most reliable source of information available about what actually happened, factually, in the case. One would think a reasonable person would find it at least relevant.

One does not normally start spraying ones crops with RoundUp. This, as they say, kills the crop. That the farmer did so and just happened to wind up with a large population of RoundUp Ready plants clearly suggests that the farmer was breeding them selectively to get the Monsanto patented plants for free, not just that they "happened" to be there and reproduce.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: