87 



owner of the variety for seeding purposes and use such saved seed in the production 

 of a crop for use on his farm, or for sale as provided in section (c) of this section; 



(b) It is an act of infringement under section 111(1) for a person to sell seed 

 obtained from his harvest for reproductive purposes without authorization of the 

 owner; 



(c) A bona fide sale .... 



This would be done by adding the underlined portions below and deleting the 

 shaded portions: 



(a) it shall not infringe any right hereunder for a person to save seed produced 

 by him from seed obtained, or descended from seed obtained, by authority of the 

 owner of the variety for seeding purposes and use such saved seed in the production 

 of a crop on his farm, or for sale as provided in this section; 



lb) It is an act of infringement under sectio n 1 1 U \) for a person to sell seed 

 obtained from his hardest for reproductive purposes; 



Provided. 1 



(c) A bona fide sale .... 



Page 15 r line 22 thru page 16. line 14 

 ASGROW finds sections 12 (TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) and 13 

 (EFFECTIVE DATE) not in the best interest of the seed industry or the American 

 farmer because they will: 



( 1 ) Delay the introduction of new genetics. 



(2) Slow down or reduce research investment until full protection is 

 achieved. 



(3) Cause additional expense in the separate tracking and enforcement 

 of individual protected varieties before and after enactment. 



(4) Cause confusion and uncertainty among farmer customers. 



We strongly recommend that the amendments to the PVPA be equally effective 

 to all current PVP-protected varieties plus new varieties as they are approved. The 

 only exception to this is the proof and support of "essentially derived". Only varieties 



