29 



The Plant Variety Protection Act, on the other hand, really deals 

 pretty straightforwardly with a breeder's rights, and that, obvi- 

 ously, is another dimension of the issue that you raise. How one 

 brings those together in a way that remains consistent with the 

 UPOV convention would be something we would have to try to 

 work with you on. 



Clearly, we do need to stay as consistent as we can, though, with 

 the UPOV convention. 



Mr. STENHOLM. Yes, I just think that is an interesting scenario 

 where you have the breeder defaulting on a contract. Perhaps there 

 is bankruptcy, perhaps there is no way you can receive payment. 

 I mean, you can build all kind of scenarios into it. But I raise that 

 question, and it is something not only for you but for other wit- 

 nesses today who may want to comment. 



So far, that is the only question that has been called to my atten- 

 tion. 



Mr. Dooley. 



Mr. DOOLEY. Dr. Clayton, I just am not as familiar with this leg- 

 islation as I should be nor the existing situation, but in your writ- 

 ten statement as well as your oral statement you stated that, how- 

 ever, the privilege of farmers to sell saved seed protected under the 

 present law would not be diminished. Can you elaborate on that a 

 little bit? 



Mr. Clayton. Congressman Dooley, I would be happy to do that. 



In the process of trying to bring our domestic Plant Variety Pro- 

 tection Act into conformance with the international UPOV, while at 

 the same time recognizing that there have been existing privileges 

 in particular that the farm community has enjoyed with respect to 

 the use of seed, we have tried to fashion a middle ground, basically, 

 which in the simplest terms says that varieties currently protected, 

 the current rules would apply in terms of farmers' right to save 

 and sell seed. 



However, henceforth, once we have modified our legislation to 

 bring it into conformance with the 1991 UPOV convention, which 

 is very explicit on its prohibition of sale of saved seed, any varieties 

 which would be protected under the amended statute would basi- 

 cally have to play by those new rules. And so for a period of time 

 we will likely have two classes of protected varieties, one where the 

 current rules prevail and another which, henceforth, where the 

 new rules would prevail. 



Mr. Dooley. So the article that was in the Wall Street Journal 

 earlier this week that talked about the court case — I think it is at 

 the Supreme Court now — that depending on what the Court's inter- 

 pretation is, whether or not it is half of their acreage or whatever 

 it is, is that that practice, if the Court allows — or agreed with the 

 farmers in this case, that would then allow that practice to con- 

 tinue if that variety was licensed prior to this act being enacted? 



Mr. Clayton. Only for those varieties which are protected under 

 the law, up to the time when the Congress would amend it. 



Mr. DOOLEY. So we will not be able to prevent that practice for 

 already, prior-licensed varieties from continuing under the pro- 

 posed legislation? 



Mr. Clayton. That is correct, for varieties which would be pro- 

 tected under the current legislation. 



82-169 0-94-2 



