Ethics & Seeds

[King Arthur]

So there is constant talk on the forums about fake, watered down, or just plain stolen genetics. I set up this poll to get a feeling of how the majority feel about this. While I believe that taking ones genetics an using them without giving credit is wrong ... I feel like it is any other product. Take a car for example, 4 wheels a body an engine and all the things that make it move. If someone said nah man you can't use the 4 wheel body for yours because it is my creation I would tell them to go fuck themselves as the 4 wheel car is a proven efficient way to travel.

If female seeds comes out with c99 from the brothers grim at half price but used their genetics to make it, why do you feel it is wrong to purchase from them? Must we wait until brothers grimm goes out of business? Should we wait until the next drop even though we don't know when it will happen?

I find nothing but silliness in the triviality of this situation. If it is good weed and is close enough to the description of what I am buying then by all means I will buy again. Even if swerve is a shithole had his beans served me well I would have kept growing them.

Don't use this thread as a flame ground or I will ask for it to be locked.

 

[Observe & Report]

This debate was settled decades ago. You can't trademark a plant variety. Anyone is free to sell seeds/cuttings under the name "blueberry" or "gorilla glue" or whatever. In addition the market has spoken: they don't care who developed a strain. If they did, JD Short wouldn't be having a bitch fest about it. Consumers definitely don't care and most growers don't either. Count the number of "Who has the best XXX" vs "Who has the original XXX" threads in Seed & Strain reviews.

 

[King Arthur]

This debate was settled decades ago. You can't trademark a plant variety. Anyone is free to sell seeds/cuttings under the name "blueberry" or "gorilla glue" or whatever. In addition the market has spoken: they don't care who developed a strain. If they did, JD Short wouldn't be having a bitch fest about it. Consumers definitely don't care and most growers don't either. Count the number of "Who has the best XXX" vs "Who has the original XXX" threads in Seed & Strain reviews.

I started this thread so people could voice their concerns publicly in a thread that isn't a newbies who is asking for advice. We got some dude asking about dinafem strains and you got the holy rollers poppin in to tell them all this shit that isn't even needed. If they are a shady company and rip people off sure tell them but ffs I am on the page of who the fuck cares if it is original this is fuckin weed man lol. If all someone cares about is getting rich off this plant then yeah they might care but I just like to pass around genetics and share some good weed.

Fuck all the bullshit.

 

[Mr.Head]

"Buy from a less expensive breeder who used original genetics"

I voted for this one. If someone can make a reasonable priced comparable product to a competitor there is nothing wrong with that IMO. I think a lot of breeders pricing is ridiculous.

If these breeders want to get into this "I created this strain" then they need to stabilize the strain to a point where the desired pheno is found 90% of the time, no one wants to do that work, so it doesn't really matter where I get my seeds from as long as their breeding practices are proper then the beans should come out close if they used the same genetics.

IF breeders want the same protections that the ornamental guys get they need to do the work and produce quality plants that are consistent. People threatening to sue others need to shut their yap and actually fucking read something about what it takes to trademark a plant, they look like idiots. The information is out there, an easy google away, but there are still retards threatening to sue over using unworked genetics.

It's like they throw some pollen on a plant an expect it to pay their bills for the rest of their lives....

 

[D_Urbmon]

I would prefer to buy from the original breeder when possible if I am seeking a specific product that they are known for creating. I would want the real deal, not a knock or re-creation. Afterall I'm after that specific product(strain) in it's original form.

With that being said at the same time I really don't care for ownership claims and drama and bullshit. That's all ass backwards to me. It's not exactly progressive in freeing this plant from the chains of prohibition..... and I don't believe in owning cuts and whatnot. But then again I'm not a cash cropper or entrepreneur......... so to me it's not about that. I'm after authenticity. Example If I really want a bottle of Coca-Cola, I'm not gonna go buy a RC Cola. But if the authentic Coca Cola was nowhere to be found within miles I might settle for RC.

So it kind of doesn't matter to me because I just want to grow myself some good quality herbs but at the same time I would likely buy from the original breeder..... if that makes sense.

 

[King Arthur]

I would prefer to buy from the original breeder when possible if I am seeking a specific product that they are known for creating. I would want the real deal, not a knock or re-creation. Afterall I'm after that specific product(strain) in it's original form.

With that being said at the same time I really don't care for ownership claims and drama and bullshit. That's all ass backwards to me. It's not exactly progressive in freeing this plant from the chains of prohibition..... and I don't believe in owning cuts and whatnot. But then again I'm not a cash cropper or entrepreneur......... so to me it's not about that. I'm after authenticity. Example If I really want a bottle of Coca-Cola, I'm not gonna go buy a RC Cola. But if the authentic Coca Cola was nowhere to be found within miles I might settle for RC.

So it kind of doesn't matter to me because I just want to grow myself some good quality herbs but at the same time I would likely buy from the original breeder..... if that makes sense.

I totally agree with the Coca-Cola vs RC Cola analogy, that is a good one! I try to go after the originals as well but a lot of crosses are using the originals in them and the crosses often times hold more traits than the original for me.

RC Cola is a leg down from coke, no doubt about it.

 

[VirtualHerd]

Not my place to police the ethics of the seed game. I try to support, when I can breeders that have quality at what I consider to be a fair price. I won't pay $120 for a ten pack of untested or hyped gear. The kids will always clamor for what is perceieved to be the latest and greatest but time and grows will always have the final word. Ultimately, I will buy what I want to buy for my reasons and grow it.

 

[GrowUrOwnDank]

So there is constant talk on the forums about fake, watered down, or just plain stolen genetics. I set up this poll to get a feeling of how the majority feel about this. While I believe that taking ones genetics an using them without giving credit is wrong ... I feel like it is any other product. Take a car for example, 4 wheels a body an engine and all the things that make it move. If someone said nah man you can't use the 4 wheel body for yours because it is my creation I would tell them to go fuck themselves as the 4 wheel car is a proven efficient way to travel.

If female seeds comes out with c99 from the brothers grim at half price but used their genetics to make it, why do you feel it is wrong to purchase from them? Must we wait until brothers grimm goes out of business? Should we wait until the next drop even though we don't know when it will happen?

I find nothing but silliness in the triviality of this situation. If it is good weed and is close enough to the description of what I am buying then by all means I will buy again. Even if swerve is a shithole had his beans served me well I would have kept growing them.

Don't use this thread as a flame ground or I will ask for it to be locked.

Your poll is missing a little something. "Buy from a reputable breeder you trust". I personally buy strains that are fast, easy, hardy and where I read good reviews/journals. That's how I was turned onto the breeders I've grown. So far, Dinafem, Speedy seeds, World of Seeds and DNA. Oh yeah. I mostly only grow autos because they are so easy and I don't need much cause I only grow for personal. So...... Different strokes for different reasons I suppose. Anyway, interesting thread.

 

[st0wandgrow]

I won't pay $120 for a ten pack of untested or hyped gear.

Yep. I long ago came to the conclusion that there is no correlation between price and quality in this business. In fact, some of the most dissapointing seeds I have run have been the most expensive.

 

[greenghost420]

the coke vs rc arguement isnt really accurate. did rc take cokes recipe or is it rcs version of cola? not exactly fair to buy a pack , f2 and sell it. more like buying cd or dvd, copying it and selling that for the lowlow. bootlegging genetics lol but if the line isnt being worked, why not do it.

 

[BDOGKush]

If Cannabis wasn't illegal, breeders would be able to get plant breeder's rights but they'd also have to stabalize their work more than anyone in the cannabis industry seems to.

They'd never get breeder rights if there was a variety in pheno types, the plant would have to have fixed genetics traits. So if you treat it the same as any other plant that gets breeder protection, then you'll be hard pressed to find a cannabis breeder who's strain qualifies for protection rights.

 

[thenotsoesoteric]

I think plagiarism is the problem. Not giving people credit for the work they put into a strain, or anything for that matter, is fucked up.

I also think it's retard for people to calm they "made" a strain. From what genetics did they "make" their strains? They got their "strains" from genetics that have been modified by human intervention for thousands of years. Owning trademarks to any plant or animal is greedy corporation, scum ball, slime, tactics but taking credit for working marijuana seeds to a certain level is totally understandable.

Example, Dj short's blueberry. Did he send years of his life cultivating seeds he was gifted with to get a certain set of desirable traits? Yes, but he did not produce those seeds out of his god like powers, he built on what was already there. People that used the Dj "blueberry" for their crosses should respectfully disclose that information when touting about their own mix, giving credit for the work he did. It's comparable to someone running the final leg of a relay race but taking credit for winning the whole race by themselves.

While work should be credited, pot "strains" are not in the same category of intellectual property as inventions/words/songs. To me using other people's work/strain is totally acceptable as long as credit is given, but I think it is in bad taste to infringe apon their intellectual property by stealing or using the same name as they did. Ex. say you call your mix of greenhouse's and sensi's white widow, your white widow ie. like what dinafem has done. That is plagiarism, I mean why not call it white widow II, white widow remix or something along those lines but not white widow as though it's the one that both sensi and greenhouse have spent years marketing. But I guess in there is no honor among thieves and since the early 2000's people in capitalist countries, like our great old US of A, seem to think you have to be a thief to make money in sales.

 

[Observe & Report]

Yep. I long ago came to the conclusion that there is no correlation between price and quality in this business. In fact, some of the most dissapointing seeds I have run have been the most expensive.

Look at Mean Gene / Aficionado. Some of the most expensive seeds ($150-300 a pack) and they come in ridiculous marketing/packaging (jewelry box, wax sealed glass vial (not a perfume sample,) a leather "menu" that looks like the specials at a steakhouse, etc...). BUT, they have won (twice) or have been in the top five for the last five years (two strains last year) in the Emerald Cup. Out hundreds of entries. The EC doesn't post its protocol but judging is done "blind" and the finalists are redjudged in a big group session. Nobody else seems to be doing so well at the EC.

 

[King Arthur]

Your poll is missing a little something. "Buy from a reputable breeder you trust". I personally buy strains that are fast, easy, hardy and where I read good reviews/journals. That's how I was turned onto the breeders I've grown. So far, Dinafem, Speedy seeds, World of Seeds and DNA. Oh yeah. I mostly only grow autos because they are so easy and I don't need much cause I only grow for personal. So...... Different strokes for different reasons I suppose. Anyway, interesting thread.

Yeah, I hit the submit button and couldn't go back for it. But I would assume most educated growers go after something trustworthy.

 

[D_Urbmon]

the coke vs rc arguement isnt really accurate. did rc take cokes recipe or is it rcs version of cola? not exactly fair to buy a pack , f2 and sell it. more like buying cd or dvd, copying it and selling that for the lowlow. bootlegging genetics lol but if the line isnt being worked, why not do it.

Well what I mean in the analogy is that, RC is similar to coke. It looks like it, tastes kind of like it, smells like it, is very similar to, but is not Coca Cola. It may be a fairly poor analogy but I think you know what I'm saying. Bah bad analogy.

It's hard to make an analogy to someone making and selling f2's of someone elses gear. Can't really make f2's with Coca Cola.


Also I don't drink Soda for the record, was just trying to use that as an example.

 

[King Arthur]

Well what I mean in the analogy is that, RC is similar to coke. It looks like it, tastes kind of like it, smells like it, is very similar to, but is not Coca Cola. It may be a fairly poor analogy but I think you know what I'm saying. Bah bad analogy.

It's hard to make an analogy to someone making and selling f2's of someone elses gear. Can't really make f2's with Coca Cola.


Also I don't drink Soda for the record, was just trying to use that as an example.

I totally dig it, I drink soda as a desert almost. Hardly ever but rootbeer calls my name every once n a while. I try to be as transparent as possible for everyone. I even post when something is unnamed by the breeder and I make my own name up for it. I mean I could just make my own name for it and it wouldn't be shady but I still post that it was originally unnamed ya know.

I don't give a shit about sharing info because the more info people have the more educated decisions they can make. I wouldn't put out a sheisty product so I have no fear.

 

[GrowUrOwnDank]

Yeah, I hit the submit button and couldn't go back for it. But I would assume most educated growers go after something trustworthy.

It's cool. But, what I like most about Dinafem and sweet seeds is that when they put out their own version of whatever, they really make them strong and hardy. I ABSOLUTELY LOVE Dinafem! But, I know there are plenty of other good breeders out there like Dinafem and DNA genetics. So, I will probably try different stuff in the future of I see some good reviews and journals out there. Let's face it, like autos cell phones and anything else, what was going on 20 years ago is now obsolete. Let that past go and lets move on! That's progress.

 

[GrowUrOwnDank]

I think plagiarism is the problem. Not giving people credit for the work they put into a strain, or anything for that matter, is fucked up.

I also think it's retard for people to calm they "made" a strain. From what genetics did they "make" their strains? They got their "strains" from genetics that have been modified by human intervention for thousands of years. Owning trademarks to any plant or animal is greedy corporation, scum ball, slime, tactics but taking credit for working marijuana seeds to a certain level is totally understandable.

Example, Dj short's blueberry. Did he send years of his life cultivating seeds he was gifted with to get a certain set of desirable traits? Yes, but he did not produce those seeds out of his god like powers, he built on what was already there. People that used the Dj "blueberry" for their crosses should respectfully disclose that information when touting about their own mix, giving credit for the work he did. It's comparable to someone running the final leg of a relay race but taking credit for winning the whole race by themselves.

While work should be credited, pot "strains" are not in the same category of intellectual property as inventions/words/songs. To me using other people's work/strain is totally acceptable as long as credit is given, but I think it is in bad taste to infringe apon their intellectual property by stealing or using the same name as they did. Ex. say you call your mix of greenhouse's and sensi's white widow, your white widow ie. like what dinafem has done. That is plagiarism, I mean why not call it white widow II, white widow remix or something along those lines but not white widow as though it's the one that both sensi and greenhouse have spent years marketing. But I guess in there is no honor among thieves and since the early 2000's people in capitalist countries, like our great old US of A, seem to think you have to be a thief to make money in sales.

Dude! You can write a history of genetics of weed if you want. But I'ma embrace the present and te future. The early 2000's ARE OBSOLETE! I love me some Dinafem.

 

[Sativied]

That car analogy doesn't fit... That car has multiple specific characteristics, traits, like color, shape, and many individual pieces that make up that car. Yet ironically your analogy is exactly what it's about, it is indeed OK to use the genes that result in a 4-wheel body. It's not ok to take a Porsche and put it in a copy machine and print more Porsches if you could. Well, apparently for some it is if that means they can get it cheaper...

I think plagiarism is the problem. Not giving people credit for the work they put into a strain, or anything for that matter, is fucked up.

Try to explain that to the kids in the internet age...

If Cannabis wasn't illegal, breeders would be able to get plant breeder's rights but they'd also have to stabalize their work more than anyone in the cannabis industry seems to.

They'd never get breeder rights if there was a variety in pheno types, the plant would have to have fixed genetics traits. So if you treat it the same as any other plant that gets breeder protection, then you'll be hard pressed to find a cannabis breeder who's strain qualifies for protection rights.

It needs to be stable for the traits that make that strain that unique strain. Breeder rights (in NL and Belgium amongst others) also allow for using anyone's genes to create a NEW strain, plans are to make that standard in europe, which is amongst others to make it harder for monsanto and other pocketfillers.


Buying cheaper from pollen chucking pocket fillers who unnecessarily narrow down the gene pool without actually creating a new strain, or at the very least an improved version, isn't helping anyone but the pocket fillers. There are worse problems in the world one might think, but it does affect the genepool and it doesn't help those few breeders who are willing to put the time and work into creating stable strains (and not the pollenchuckers or homebreeders won't want to make their own crosses).

Breeder's rights exist to amongst others keep the total gene pool available for future breeders, it's not about money, it's about cannabis. I don't let skyman or laws determine my ethics and morals, just because cannabis is illegal wrong doesn't become right and right doesn't become wrong...

Buy from breeders who put the most work in it for you so they can continue doing that again and again. Simple as that.

 

[Observe & Report]

Let's face it, like autos cell phones and anything else, what was going on 20 years ago is now obsolete. Let that past go and lets move on! That's progress.

Yeah, nobody grows that old stuff like Trainwreck, Urkle, Blueberry, or Chemdawg anymore because people just aren't buying.