I don't believe US or EU will sell them the crops without patent enforcement.

It terrifies me to have a patent on the only crop that can grow in a country.

Food is a necessity

What happens if the seller decides to quadruple the price overnight ? (à la OPEC but for crops)

If some country does 'sanctions' ? (like Russia or the USA when they can't just declare a war to a place)

or if the economy collapses and imports are expensive ? (imagine Venezuela, but the country is also not able to buy crops that work)

these crops sellers will own the Kenyans.

I wouldn't buy the crops if patents were enforced.

it feels like some SF novel (or the Washington Consensus, yet again)

Back in the days, China forced foreign companies to work with domestic companies to sell in China. And at least, they are independent on some technologies now.

I don’t think it is ever a case that someone can patent the only crop you can grow. Parents are not issued for such broad categories. You cannot patent corn or potatoes as a whole. What is patentable is a specific variety of corn that you develop anew. This means that you can always grow the traditional varieties that are not (and cannot be) patented. If a seller of patented variety quadruples seed price, you can just go back to these if patented variety is not worth the extra cost.

Except that your neighbor bought into the patented crop and nature pollinated your crops, cross contaminating your fields and placing you into patent infringement.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-monsanto-organic-lawsuit/...

Nobody has ever been sued for accidental cross contamination this, and Monsanto explicitly says that it will never sue anyone for this.

> In its ruling Monday, the appellate court said the organic growers must rely on Monsanto assurances on the company’s website that it will not sue them so long as the mix is very slight

That is about as good as "trust us." If it is unclear, that is a really bad position legally.

In theory, maybe, but in practice nobody (in particular, no serious, non-hobby farmers) cares about it other than activists who hate Monsanto. Outside of activist groups and NGOs, this is simply a non-issue.

Big corporation with shady past promises us nicely that they will not sue...thanks, I'll pass!

There is a Hugo Award-winning SciFi book about this called The Wind Up Girl. It imagines a future where petroleum is depleted and “Calorie Companies” wield power by controlling the supply of blight resistant crops.

> It terrifies me to have a patent on the only crop that can grow in a country.

If dreaming up an implausible scenario scares you, maybe that's on you?

On the bright side, this would probably happen only if the host country doesn't block these crops and continue enforcing those patents as the situation gets dire.

A sane gov. would pull the brakes pretty fast.

On the dirty side, a gov could be forced in that situation as a condition to receive foreign investment or other critical foreign intervention. We've seen it happen with water infra built under a condition of monopoly, an puting the country's water at the mercy of an international company.

You don't need patent enforcement for hybrid crops, which is pretty much every seed other than soybeans which is an heirloom crop. Corn has major hybrid vigor, so only a totally ignorant farmer would try to replant harvested corn. Corn seeds are made by crossing two heirloom corn varieties at a seed farm, e.g. Southern Dent is crossed with Northern Flint (both are about 5 feet tall and make small ears), to make hybrid corn which grows about 8 feet tall and has massive ears. When you sell seeds, you don't get access to the heirloom plants needed to make the seed. No need for patents.

With soybeans however, they breed true as heirlooms. The GMO beans were sold with the promise that farmers don't use the crop as seeds. Since everything other than soybeans are hybrids, the issue is largely moot.

you're somewhat right and somewhat wrong.

> patents are not globally enforceable

right

> If your patent has been published, it may be no longer capable of attaining a foreign patent.

Wrong. There is a Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), which most nations of the world are signatories to, which avoids this problem. You file PCT first, and then your filing date is set for all national-stage patent filings later.

> Virtually no patents -- even very important ones -- are filed in every possible jurisdiction

Right.

The PCT thing isn't automatic, though, and it is quite expensive. (Filing fees in the $3000-5000 range for most US entities.) I believe that the majority of US patent filers don't make use of it.

...And, even if you do file a PCT application, you have to follow it up with patent filings in the foreign offices of your choice -- for that application doesn't grant you a patent, just a priority date in foreign patent offices and an extended deadline to file.

I wonder whether Monsanto et al.'s patents are valid in Kenya. Their patent office's site doesn't contain much information: kipi.go.ke

> The PCT thing isn't automatic, though, and it is quite expensive.

Nonetheless, that's what a multinational company would do.

> you have to follow it up with patent filings in the foreign offices of your choice

that's what I said.

As for Kenyan patents: I don't think it matters. If you can only manufacture the seeds in the US or UK, then patents in those countries would suffice.