11
8/2/2019 Yellow Bean http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 1/11 THE YELLOW BEAN CONTROVERSY BY- BIJOYA BANIK(214) & DEEPIKA BOHRA(222)

Yellow Bean

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 1/11

THE YELLOW BEAN

CONTROVERSY

BY-BIJOYA BANIK(214) & DEEPIKA

BOHRA(222)

Page 2: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 2/11

• In 1994, Larry Proctor, the owner of a U.S.-

based seed company, purchased a bag of 

commercial bean seeds in Sonora, Mexico. He

carried the beans back to the United States,

where he picked out the yellow-colored

beans, planted them and allowed them to

self-pollinate.

Page 3: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 3/11

• Two years later, Proctor applied for and won a

U.S. patent on any dry bean (Phaseolus

vulgaris) having a seed color of a particular

shade of yellow. He also obtained a plant

variety protection certificate on the yellow

bean variety he called “Enola.” 

Page 4: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 4/11

• In late 1999, armed with the patent and

breeders’ right certificate, Proctor sued two

companies that sell Mexican beans in the

United States, charging that they were

infringing upon his patent monopoly.

Page 5: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 5/11

• As a result, shipments of Mexican yellow

beans had been routinely stopped at the U.S.

border, forcing Mexican bean farmers to

forfeit valuable export income. In November

2001, Proctor also filed a suit against 16 small

bean seed companies and farmers in

Colorado.

Page 6: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 6/11

• In December 2000 the International Center for

Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) filed a formal

request for re-examination of U.S. patent no.

5,894,079—also known as the yellow bean or

“Enola bean” patent—with the U.S. Patent &

Trademark Office (PTO) in Washington, D.C.

Page 7: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 7/11

• CIAT is an international plant breeding

institute that maintains a gene bank

containing more than 27,000 samples of 

Phaseolus seeds collected from farmers’ 

fields, including beans that are identical to

Proctor’s patented yellow bean.

• CIAT legally challenged the patent to keepthese beans in the public domain.

Page 8: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 8/11

Section 161 - In order to be granted a patent,

the inventor must show that the invention:

(1) is new or a new improvement on an already

existing invention,

(2) is novel,

(3) has utility, and

(4) is non-obvious.

Page 9: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 9/11

• Under Secion102(a)

the invention cannot be “known or used in thiscountry, or patented or described in a printed

publication in this or a foreign country.” • Document shows use in the United States of 

similar beans of Mexican origin dating back the1930s.

• Mexico also claims that a bean registered inSinaloa, Mexico in 1978 has the same geneticfingerprint as the Enola bean.

Page 10: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 10/11

• The US Patent and Trademark office, in 2008,

overturned the controversial patent on the

breed of yellow beans.

Page 11: Yellow Bean

8/2/2019 Yellow Bean

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yellow-bean 11/11

CONCLUSION

• The yellow bean controversy starkly illustratesthe power of exclusive monopoly patents to blockagricultural imports

•To disrupt or destroy export markets for ThirdWorld farmers

• To legally appropriate staple food crops or sacredmedicinal plants.

• Similar predatory patent examples - South Asianbasmati, Bolivian quinoa, Amazonian ayahuasca,Peruvian maca and Indian chickpeas