6 



Mr. Chairman, let me state at the outset that the administration 

 does support enactment of S. 1406. In the United States, one effec- 

 tive form of protecting new plant varieties that are reproduced by 

 seed is by means of the Plant Variety Protection Act, otherwise re- 

 ferred to as the PVPA. The PVPA passed the Congress in 1970. 



To afford our plant breeders protection in other countries as 

 well, the United States became a member of the UPOV Convention 

 in 1981. After several years of extended negotiations, the conven- 

 tion was significantly revised in 1991 to provide plant breeders 

 with improved protection for innovative plant varieties. Although 

 the United States is a signatory to the 1991 act of the UPOV Con- 

 vention, the PVPA must be amended to enable the United States 

 to adhere or become party to the 1991 version. 



Mr. Chairman, given the limited time available to us today, I 

 would like to briefly address the more important changes to the 

 PVPA that S. 1406 would bring about. 



Turning first to the farmers' exemption provisions, S. 1406 would 

 continue to safeguard the privilege of farmers to save seed of a pro- 

 tected variety for planting on their own holdings. The sale of seed 

 by farmers to others would be prohibited under S. 1406. 



However, and I must underscore this, the privilege of farmers to 

 sell saved seed protected under present law would not be dimin- 

 ished. Rather, sale of saved seed would be subject to authorization 

 by the breeder only for varieties receiving protection after the date 

 of enactment of S. 1406. This change in the farmers' exemption is 

 necessary in order for the United States to comply with the 1991 

 convention. 



Without encouragement for investment in the development of 

 new varieties, the whole farming community will gradually be put 

 at an economic disadvantage. Fewer plant varieties with improved 

 characteristics would be developed, leaving farmers to plant out- 

 moded varieties which give lower yields and which succumb to new 

 strains of pests and diseases, thus giving farmers in other countries 

 a clear competitive advantage. 



Another major change to be made by S. 1406 is the establishment 

 of a category of essentially derived varieties. This change, which 

 would be applicable only to varieties protected under S. 1406 and 

 would not apply retroactively, would enable the owner of an initial 

 variety to exclude the selling or marketing of varieties that differ 

 only slightly from the initial variety. This concept is the most 

 striking innovation in the 1991 revision of the UPOV Convention. 

 It is anticipated that this change will end the practice of altering 

 just slightly the successful varieties of others and escaping in- 

 fringement charges under present law. 



Other changes necessary to bring the PVPA into conformance 

 with the 1991 convention are more limited in scope. For example, 

 the use of date of determination would be replaced by the use of 

 data of filing for protection as the basis for determining eligibility 

 for protection. Eligibility for protection would also be extended to 

 first generation hybrid varieties. 



Also, to conform to the 1991 act of the UPOV Convention, provi- 

 sion is made for protected varieties to be sold by variety name only. 

 Breeders would no longer be able to market seed of a protected va- 

 riety labeled as "variety not stated." 



