Monsanto Canada Inc

question 115

Multiple Choice

Monsanto Canada Inc. developed a strain of canola seed that was resistant to a herbicide that Monsanto produced. Monsanto patented this strain of genetically-engineered seed. Schmeiser, a farmer, noticed that some of his crop was resistant to this herbicide. He collected these seeds and replanted them. When it turned out his plants contained the genetically-modified genes, Monsanto sued for patent infringement. In the case of Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser, what did the Supreme Court of Canada hold?

• A) One can patent genetically altered plant forms. Monsanto lost the action, however, as the farmer's infringement was not deliberate.
• B) One cannot patent genetically altered plant forms. Life forms cannot properly be the subject of a patent application.
• C) One can patent genetically altered plant forms. By collecting, saving, and planting the seeds, the farmer infringed the Patent Act.
• D) While genetically altered plant forms can be patented for medical purposes, they cannot be patented for commercial gain.
• E) Possession of genetically-modified plants is illegal in Canada. Accordingly, the civil action was dismissed.

---

Definitions:

Consumer Goods

Items produced for personal use by households.

Production Possibilities Frontier

A curve depicting all maximum output possibilities for two goods, given a set of inputs consisting of resources and other factors.

Economic Growth

A rise in the output of goods and services in the economy, measured from one time period to another.

Consumer Goods

Items bought by the typical consumer for their own use, encompassing long-lasting items, perishable products, and various services.