Old World Genetics - DJ Short

Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
althor said:
Yeah, his son. Several years ago he popped up on this site trying to get things going, but he was a pretty entitled guy with an attitude. He is also one of the breeders who thinks he should be collecting royalties on every strain sold since DJ Short genetics have been used so much in so many different strains.
Click to expand...
Royalties ? How "Monsanto" of him.

The problem with "intellectual property" is it's an oxymoron. You can own property, it's a tangible unique and distinctly separate thing from other pieces of property.

You can't own an idea in reality though, since it is something that can be possessed (held) by many different people at the same time, which provides the evidence that it isn't "property".

Creative people sometimes come up with an idea, but that doesn't mean the idea has created physical property that only the originator of the idea can own. Intellectual property is an impossibility wrapped up and upheld only in the context of a man made legal construct.
 
CannaBruh

CannaBruh

Well-Known Member
With the appropriate copyright, trademarks, trade secret or patent how does your theory hold up @Rob Roy ?

I think it speaks greater about the exploiting nature of the canna industry and humans in general. Dj had a thread specifically about this when he gave away his parent stock years ago... so it's a bit ironic the shit flinging coming back about this.

Are you really going to bash a guy for wanting to express his feelings on what has perceptually became a cash grab with genetics the guy's father birthed?
 
Pa-Nature

Pa-Nature

Well-Known Member
Blueberry was always a finicky plant most didn't know how to feed it .
And cuts were kept for many years .
But being a tough grow most didn't keep it .
Most pot smokers could not deal with it's high maintenance structure.
My 2 cents .
I used a male bb ylto cross with BMS and he gave me all male offspring.
17 for 17 so far .
I now have a sannie bb and motrebal x I seedling for praying it a fem .
I with then hit her with her own juice of I can learn how .
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
CannaBruh said:
With the appropriate copyright, trademarks, trade secret or patent how does your theory hold up @Rob Roy ?

I think it speaks greater about the exploiting nature of the canna industry and humans in general. Dj had a thread specifically about this when he gave away his parent stock years ago... so it's a bit ironic the shit flinging coming back about this.

Are you really going to bash a guy for wanting to express his feelings on what has perceptually became a cash grab with genetics the guy's father birthed?
Click to expand...
Not bashing anybody personally, I don't know father or son.

I do disagree with anybody claiming to own plant genetics in the royalty sense....where did DJ Short get "his" genetics from in the first place? He owns the plant(s) he made. He owns the seeds he made. He doesn't own plants others made from seeds he sold to them. He got fully paid when he sold the seeds unless both buyer and seller made an agreement otherwise.

If junior Short wants to collect "royalties" , would that also make him responsible for any hermies produced from "their" seeds and resultant problems caused by the hermies ? How would that work?

I'm saying that claiming royalties based on the premise of "intellectual property" is an absurdity because it begins with the faulty premise that an idea can be owned by only one person. It can't. Two people can hold the same idea at once, without a property right being violated.

To violate a real property right, involving actual property, you would need to dispossess somebody of an ACTUAL unique piece of property, a physical and tangible thing.

My theory that "intellectual property" is a legal construct seems to be aided, rather than refuted by the first line in your post. You are referring to legal constructs there right?

Anyhow, more on topic, I can sympathize with a person wanting to get credit for "creating" a strain, but that doesn't mean they forever own the progeny of their creation. If that were so, DJ Short owes the people he got his seeds from some money and they in turn owe some guy from hundreds of years ago who produced the seeds that produced the seeds etc. that they used in Thailand, Afghanistan and Mexico.

The last blueberry I grew was mediocre weed. Seeds came from a guy that pollen chucked some "real deal DJ Short blueberry".
That isn't meant to disparage anybody, it's meant to show the disconnect people have when they only look at things from the filter of their own perspective. I'm not mad at DJ Short for the mediocre weed, nor would I feel like I owed his kid money if the weed was outrageously good. Happy trails.
 
CannaBruh

CannaBruh

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
My theory that "intellectual property" is a legal construct seems to be aided, rather than refuted by the first line in your post. You are referring to legal constructs there right?
Click to expand...
Aided in what way? I didn't disagree with you that it is a construct, I disagree with this >> You can't own an idea in reality though, since it is something that can be possessed (held) by many different people at the same time, which provides the evidence that it isn't "property".

How many cases have you successfully defended against infringement on this theory?

In short I do agree with the plants genetics ownership nonsense, however at the same time I can appreciate where someone might be upset over it.
But this is not the same as saying that an entity/person cannot own IP.. that's silly.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
CannaBruh said:
Aided in what way? I didn't disagree with you that it is a construct, I disagree with this >> You can't own an idea in reality though, since it is something that can be possessed (held) by many different people at the same time, which provides the evidence that it isn't "property".

How many cases have you successfully defended against infringement on this theory?

In short I do agree with the plants genetics ownership nonsense, however at the same time I can appreciate where someone might be upset over it.
But this is not the same as saying that an entity/person cannot own IP.. that's silly.
Click to expand...

I have an idea. My idea is to grab a cold beer, a fistful of joints and go relax down by the fishing hole.

You say, "hey great idea, can I come", now you also hold the same idea. I "created" the idea, but because it's not tangible, you can now hold the idea too. You haven't dispossessed me in any way by holding the same idea now. You don't and shouldn't owe me anything for my idea.

I say "sure you can come along, I'll grab my lighter" and look nervously around for any royalty seeking cavemen who claim to have invented fire, before slipping the lighter into my pocket.

Hopefully the fish will be biting and you do not seek royalties from me, when I follow your innovative idea to swat the clouds of mosquitoes rather than let them suck the blood from my arm.

Anyway, after the first joint we both realize we could use another one, and as I light the second one up, You, being both curious and polite ask me, "hey what was that we just smoked...it was kinda mild".

I reply, it was some blueberry and take a satisfying gulp of beer to wash the taste away.

Cases I've defended? Damn it man, I'm a freakin' bigfoot, they won't let me in a courtroom!
 
CannaBruh

CannaBruh

Well-Known Member
I have an idea, I create a process and patent it. I know you're working on the same idea, but guess what?
You get to wait 17 years before you can implement. Or you can try your luck and hope I don't find out or can't afford to drag you into court.

It's pretty obvious at this point your intent is to fling crap towards Dj and JD.

Considering you've no wins in court maybe refrain from opining ;)
 
Pa-Nature

Pa-Nature

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I have an idea. My idea is to grab a cold beer, a fistful of joints and go relax down by the fishing hole.

You say, "hey great idea, can I come", now you also hold the same idea. I "created" the idea, but because it's not tangible, you can now hold the idea too. You haven't dispossessed me in any way by holding the same idea now. You don't and shouldn't owe me anything for my idea.

I say "sure you can come along, I'll grab my lighter" and look nervously around for any royalty seeking cavemen who claim to have invented fire, before slipping the lighter into my pocket.

Hopefully the fish will be biting and you do not seek royalties from me, when I follow your innovative idea to swat the clouds of mosquitoes rather than let them suck the blood from my arm.

Anyway, after the first joint we both realize we could use another one, and as I light the second one up, You, being both curious and polite ask me, "hey what was that we just smoked...it was kinda mild".

I reply, it was some blueberry and take a satisfying gulp of beer to wash the taste away.

Cases I've defended? Damn it man, I'm a freakin' bigfoot, they won't let me in a courtroom!
Click to expand...
Makes me wanna go fishing .....but only after I crop out ...NEED THAT FIST FULL OF JOINTS
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
CannaBruh said:
I have an idea, I create a process and patent it. I know you're working on the same idea, but guess what?
You get to wait 17 years before you can implement. Or you can try your luck and hope I don't find out or can't afford to drag you into court.

It's pretty obvious at this point your intent is to fling crap towards Dj and JD.

Considering you've no wins in court maybe refrain from opining ;)
Click to expand...

My intent was to get the lighter back that you pocketed from our fishing trip.

Considering "court" is a legal construct, you oughta refrain from bolstering my argument, that intellectual property is a legal construct, when you try to make your argument.

Not trying to disparage any Short people either. Don't know them, but I respect outlaw breeders from the old days, if for no other reason than they disobeyed false constructs of prohibition. So there is that. Also, I've had some pretty decent blueberry too.
 
CannaBruh

CannaBruh

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Circle jerk? Mids!!??? Poppycock, my good man.

Just imagine if the first guy that invented opposable thumb jerk off techniques had patented it how much money you'd owe him for copyrite royalties. Can't even begin to think how the royaty charges would mount up in an illicit circle jerk.
Click to expand...
Patent would be long expired which brings us back to understanding that while IP may be a construct it can prove financially painful to learn that your theory falls on its face if the 'owner' protected themselves appropriately. I might not agree with it but if people can patent/copyright their work and have the means to take it to court and win well saying it isn't the case won't be a valid defense.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
CannaBruh said:
Patent would be long expired which brings us back to understanding that while IP may be a construct it can prove financially painful to learn that your theory falls on its face if the 'owner' protected themselves appropriately. I might not agree with it but if people can patent/copyright their work and have the means to take it to court and win well saying it isn't the case won't be a valid defense.
Click to expand...

Yes, we agree when there are unbelievers, court inquisitors will dunk your head in the legal holy water until you acquiesce.

Still doesn't make a thing that is physically nonexistent,like an idea , become tangible or unique and only able to be possessed by one person in the real world. Intellectual property is an oxymoron and the term is a product of wordsmithing. It is a self contradicting term designed to create and perpetuate a kind of forcible monopoly.

But maybe the conversation should return to Old World genetics, I'm running out of steam and thinking of buying one of those make you live forever pills that @The Mantis is gonna invent and putting it my shorts so I can get my middle aged freak on all night with the Missus. Every time she screams "oh god" I'm gonna make her put another royalty nickel in the jar because I had the foresight to patent orgasmic exhortations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top