Corporate Counsel
  • Home
  • News
  • Surveys
  • Resources
  • Lawjobs
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Bookstore
  • Contact

Topics » IP Insider | Labor & Employment | From the Experts | On the Job | Moves | DC Watch | International

Home > Seeds of Conflict

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Previous

  • 1
  • 2

Seeds of Conflict

February 1, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

Monsanto, on the other hand, hailed the outcome. In fact, it's now asking Webber to triple the damages to punish DuPont for willfully violating its patent. And Snively, the Monsanto GC, took his own shots at DuPont after the verdict. In his statement he said that discovery showed "that DuPont's senior leaders were actively working to hide the fact [that] their . . . technology had failed and were using elaborate schemes to cover that up with the unlicensed use of our technology."

Patent law professor Bernard Chao, for one, sides with DuPont. A former in-house counsel at Covad Communications Group and now an assistant professor at the University of Denver School of Law, Chao is examining the case and its "novel theory of damages" in his classes. He decries the sealing of so many files, explaining that it's "one of the first high-stakes suits to involve genetically modified organisms. And it has important ramifications for agribusiness across America," as well as for Monsanto's livelihood.

"It's just crazy," Chao says of the damages. He notes that while DuPont may have experimented with Monsanto's technology, it never sold any of the seeds. "So how did the jury get there? A $1 billion verdict makes no sense to me at all," Chao continues. "Monsanto lost nothing here."

The worst nightmare for Monsanto, Chao speculates, is if Judge Webber lets the so-called compensatory damage award stand, while refusing to grant any additional punitive amount. A higher court could well decide to reduce or eliminate the $1 billion award because there was no proof of loss, Chao says, leaving Monsanto with nothing.

Even after the appeals, there's more to come. DuPont had pushed the U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust division into investigating Monsanto's stranglehold on the genetic patent. Small farmers in particular suffered because they couldn't afford Monsanto's steep prices for the seeds. Bloggers and others referred to the company as "thuggish" toward farmers, "a patent bully," and even called Monsanto "agribusiness's version of The Death Star."

But Monsanto received a boost in November. The Justice Department dropped its antitrust investigation without comment. Now DuPont is on its own as it pursues its antitrust countersuit, scheduled for trial in October. As the rival general counsel gear up for this new battle, it's hard to imagine that it can get any hotter.

Previous

  • 1
  • 2


Subscribe to Corporate Counsel

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • The Death Star
  • Pioneer Hi Bred International Inc.
  • Nemours and Company
  • Justice Department
  • Covad Communications Group Inc.
  • Patent and Trademark Office
  • Monsanto Company
  • University of Denver School
  • United States Department of Justice

Key categories

    
  • Corporate & Business Law

Most viewed stories

    
  1. What to Look for in a Board's Risk Director
    •      
  2. Safeguarding Brand Reputation In Social Media
    •      
  3. Are GCs More Than Just Legally Trained Executives?
    •      
  4. Patent Board's SAP Ruling is First Under New AIA Rules
    •      
  5. Google, Facebook, Microsoft Talk Surveillance
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

SEC Issues Whistleblower Award; More on the Horizon

Fixing Outside Counsel Budget Forecasting With Data

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

iPad Competition Heats Up

Discovery on Discovery Demands Cost-Shifting

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of HUD Forms Draws Supreme Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Restaurant in Union Square Park Ruled Permissible
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Magistrate Judge Finds Few Benefits to Class in Settlement
  •      
    • Subscription Required

3rd Circuit Could See Rise in Pay-for-Delay Litigation

Cozen Debt Forgiveness Is Campaign Contribution, Court Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Texas DA Faces Removal Suits Over DWI, Alleged Misconduct
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Upholds Disqualification of Bickel & Brewer
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fighting Over The Fifth
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Atlanta School Defendants Rely On New Jersey Officers' Case
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About Corporate Counsel   |
  • Contact Corporate Counsel   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media