96 



Why do we need to have an economically important crop like potato included 

 in the PVPAT 



A number of factors have contributed to this view by the PAA and NPC. 

 First of all, we have seen Canada institute plant breeder's rights upon potato 

 cultivars in a form similar to the UPOV Convention and also recommend that the 

 U.S. have a similar form of protection to unify North American intellectual 

 property rights. (The equivalent form of protection in the U.S. is the PVPA.) 

 A common form of protection for potatoes among UPOV countries allows the U.S. to 

 compete in a global market. Secondly, since the 1920's, potato breeding and 

 germplasm research in the U.S. has been the primary responsibility of the public 

 institutions (USDA and Land Grant Universities). In some states there has been 

 a reduction in funding of public breeding efforts and also a loss of public 

 potato breeding programs in the past few years . The reduction in funding has led 

 the public institutions to find alternate means of funding programs and to 

 explore various avenues to achieve program viability. One means of program 

 support is royalty collection via the protection of varieties. Recently, the 

 private sector has invested in biotechnology-based research to develop new potato 

 germplasm for the industry based upon publically- released varieties. The influx 

 of the private sector variety development requires that public breeders 

 collaborate with this sector of researchers so that the best germplasm reaches 

 the growers . The high investment costs of this research requires the private 

 sector to recoup their investment, and to seek means to protect their invention 

 or innovation (i.e. germplasm, variety or gene). Moreover, this relationship 

 requires both breeders and genetic engineers to have equivalent levels of 

 intellectual property protection. 



Why does the PAA and NPC desire to have the potato Included in the PVPA? 



The U.S. was the first country to make specific provision to protect new 

 plant varieties (PPA 1930; in 35 USC sections 261 to 264), which is embodied 

 through the Plant Patent Act of 1930. The potato was excluded from this form of 

 plant protection. Today, in the U.S., we have four forms of protection 

 available for plant material. These are: trade secrecy, The Plant Patent Act 

 of 1930 (PPA), The Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) of 1970, and utility 

 patents . 



Currently, we can protect potato varieties and germplasm with utility 

 patents, therefore the means already exist to obtain intellectual property rights 

 (IPR) for potatoes. This means to protect potatoes in the U.S. was non-existent 

 until utility patents began to be granted to plants in the mid-1980's. Hence, 

 the development of IPR for potatoes through utility patents occurred by default, 

 not by design. The question the PAA asked is whether this form of IPR is what 

 is needed by the industry, researchers and breeders, or do we need other forms 

 of protection? 



In general, decisions concerning the form of protection to seek for a 

 particular plant should involve: 



-2- 



