Ill 



While the seed industry has been reluctant to admit the connection between 

 plant breeders' rights and the loss of genetic diversity, the Keystone Dialogue on 

 Plant Genetic Resources (which included seed industry representatives), made 

 blunt criticisms of plant breeders' rights in this regard: 



At the level of individual plant species of agronomic value, 

 current intellectual property rights systems reinforce the 

 tendency of plant breeding to decrease genetic diversity. These 

 systems encourage the production and dissemination of new 

 varieties which often replace the more diverse landraces and 

 local crops... commercial research tends to focus on a limited 

 number of crops with large acreage or with a high profitability 

 of seed sales. Moreover, the existing uniformity requirement to 

 obtain Plant Breeders' Rights ensure a high degree of genetic 

 uniformity within a variety. The protected uniform variety ..has 

 the potential to displace more genetically diverse landraces. 5 



\ 



Tt.» ImpH^rfinn. nf FSrfa««ti«. T Pw»prietarv Protection to flaCEHted Materials 



One of the proposed changes embodied in H.R. 2927 would extend 

 proprietary protection to harvested materials of protected varieties. This means, 

 for example, that grain grown from protected seed, or any other end product that 

 is produced from proprietary seed, would be protected by the PVPA. This gives the 

 corporate breeder the power to restrict imports and exports of protected varieties 

 and their products if that product is produced using seed without authorization. 

 Seed companies could, for example, restrict imports into a UPOV-governed 

 country of farm products coming from countries that do not recognize breeders' 

 rights. End-product protection would also give a seed company the legal right to 

 prevent food aid shipments that may contain protected seed from going to a Third 

 World country that does not recognize plant breeders' rights. 



If the PVPA is amended to give breeders the power to pursue products 

 made from their varieties (even in the hands of people other than the producer of 

 the unauthorized crop) it could mean that the threat of liability for PVPA 

 infringement extends to anyone who purchases illegally reproduced seed or 

 material produced from the seed. We believe that extension of PVPA to harvested 

 materials gives corporate breeders excessive and dangerous levels of control in 

 the marketing and use of genetic materials. 



We urge members of Congress to examine closely the broader implications 

 and potentially negative impacts of such a change. The seed industry favors the 

 extension of PVPA protection to harvested materials (under UPOV) because this 

 measure would compel many developing nations to adopt plant breeders' rights 

 and thus afford reciprocal plant intellectual property protection in foreign 

 markets. 



s Keystone Center. 1990. Final Consensus Report of the Keystone International Dialogue Series on Plant 

 Genetic Resources, Madras Plenary Session, Second Plenary Session, 29 January - 2 February, Madras, 

 India. Keystone, CO. 



