It has also regained the right to sue a third party for using its technology without permission.In India, the textiles sector is the second-largest employer after agriculture, employing an estimated 32 million workers.If we are concerned about Monsanto creating a monopoly in India, we must follow the China model, where they bought seed research company Syngenta for However, the company refrained from commenting on the verdict more than saying, “We welcome the judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court.New Delhi: A ‘patented spark plug’ is of no use unless it is fitted in an engine of the car. It reportedly increased India’s cotton production threefold, from 130 lakh bales in 2000 to 390 lakh bales in 2016.
The court’s decision will make farmers happy as they will have access to latest technology across the globe, which will help increase their income. These would have been dismissed, blocking the flow of high-end R&D products — Indian farmers and agriculture would have both suffered. However, had the court denied the grant of patent based on and DuPont would also have crashed.Monsanto used an interesting analogy in Supreme Court to retain its patent rights over a Bt cotton variety that resists the bollworm pest.“It would have been a disaster if the NSL case had been upheld,” observed Gulati. NSL had subsequently petitioned the court to cancel Monsanto’s patent, and the US firm lodged counter cases for patent infringements by NSL.120Shares. The textiles ministry wants to double production, and trade to $300 billion by 2025, which will require a significant increase in the yield of cotton fibre .
As the component inside an automobile can be patented, if not the entire car, the technology inside the Wholesale Yoga Towels Suppliers seed can be patented, if not the whole seed, it said. However, with the latest decision, I have got the confidence that if I develop a technology, it will be protected,” he added.Also read: Monsanto wins legal battle for patent on cotton seeds in IndiaWhat Monsanto’s win means for Indian cotton farmerLaunched in 2002, the Bt technology is known to have brought prosperity to cotton growers.Monsanto terminated the agreement with Nuziveedu in November 2015, citing non-payment of dues.”Why did the dispute arise? said M.Monsanto can now charge royalty on its technology and is free to launch new technologies in India.
Once fitted inside a car, the patent still belongs to the plug alone and not the car. We await a copy of the complete order and will have further comment once we study the same in detail.The SC ruling is limited to the Monsanto’s Bt cotton patent.Also read: Throttled by activists at home, Indian GM seed firms find great demand overseasThePrint’s YouTube channel is now active and buzzing.“Companies who have tried to promote piracy are short-sighted,” said Ashok Gulati, agricultural economist.What this verdict means for Monsanto?The decision is a huge relief for Monsanto as it had lost its patent on the coveted Bt technology, and, potentially, 80 per cent of its income from licensing of Bt cotton seeds. Its output doubled from 26 million spindles in 2000 to 52 million spindles in 2017. “From the new fiscal year, we plan to invest 7 per cent in.