14 



In becoming a full partner in the 1991 UPOV Convention, the United States pre- 

 pares itself to continue building on a recognized and sustained superiority in agri- 

 culture. Most importantly though, it assures reciprocal plant breeders' rights with 

 other competitors and foreign developers. In turn, farmers continue their right and 

 privilege to save seed for use on their holdings. This practice is fully endorsed by 

 the ASTA, and is one that every major farm and commodity group has highlighted 

 in resolutions and supportive policy statements. 



Joining the world's agricultural leaders and our competitors, full acceptance of 

 the 1991 UPOV Convention demonstrates the United States' commitment to protect- 

 ing intellectual property rights here and abroad. This is especially important for 

 American seed companies that have breeding programs overseas. Reciprocal plant 

 breeders' rights assure continued introduction and development of new cultivars. 



1991 UPOV Convention Provisions 



As you know, the United States is a member of the 1978 UPOV Convention. You 

 have heard a historical perspective from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. They 

 have effectively outlined the provisions of the new 1991 UPOV Convention and the 

 rationale behind the changes. So, Mr. Chairman, I will not revisit that subject. I do, 

 however, want to take a little time to explain ASTA' s position and policy on these 

 new provisions. 



Mr. Chairman, a number of changes are found in the 1991 UPOV Convention, 

 some of which are administrative in nature and others are departures from the 1978 

 Convention, but have little or no impact on the U.S system of intellectual property 

 rights. It is important to note that these provisions pertain only to protected varie- 

 ties. 



The following are the main modifications in the new convention: 



Extension of the Scope of Breeders' Rights 



The following acts, with some limitations, now require the permission of the 

 breeder. They include: production or reproduction; conditioning for the purpose of 

 propagation; offering for sale; selling or other marketing; exporting; importing; and 

 stocking for any of the purposes. 



Subject to certain limitation, authorization from the breeder must be obtained in 

 respect of harvested material obtained through the unauthorized use of propagating 

 material of the protected variety. Contracting parties may also provide that the 

 breeder's authorization be obtained in respect to products directly obtained from the 

 harvested material. 



Again, the impact, Mr. Chairman, would include several noteworthy and signifi- 

 cant exceptions. These exceptions include: acts done privately and for noncommer- 

 cial purposes; acts done for experimental purposes; and acts done for the purpose of 

 breeding other varieties. 



A breeder's right can also be restricted in relation to any variety in order to 

 permit farmers to use for propagating purposes, on their own holdings, the product 

 of the harvest which they obtained by planting, on their own holdings. Most simply, 

 Mr. Chairman, the spirit of research is maintained and the ability of farmers to 

 save seed for use on their own holdings is clearly outlined. 



Introduction of the Principle of Dependence 



The principle of dependence flows from the term "essentially derived varieties." 

 This term has been defined by the UPOV Convention and is the subject of further 

 study to establish clear guidelines. Guidelines are being worked on both nationally 

 and internationally at this time, Mr. Chairman. At present, the ASTA has defined 

 the term as follows: 



Varieties which are essentially derived but nonetheless clearly distinguish- 

 able from existing protected varieties qualify for legal protection but should 

 only be commercialized with the consent of the owner of the original 

 variety. 



A new variety should be considered to be essentially derived from a protect- 

 ed variety if, in view of its characteristics and method of development, it 

 would be considered by a plant breeder of ordinary skill in the species to 

 have incorporated in the new variety essentially the genotype of the pro- 

 tected variety. Factors to be considered in evaluating the method of devel- 

 opment should include the sources of germplasm used, and the breeding 

 methods employed, including the reasonably expected results of those 

 methods. 



