DuPont Alleges Anti-Competitive Conduct In Response To Monsanto Suit
Monsanto is trying to deny farmers access to alternative technologies at a time when farmers are struggling with weeds that are increasingly resistant to current Monsanto products, said James C. Borel, DuPont group vice president.
“The litigation filed today by Monsanto is more of what we have come to expect from them,” said Borel, in response to the filing of a lawsuit by Monsanto in federal court in St. Louis, Mo. “Monsanto has a long history of using litigation and aggressive tactics to preserve their monopoly and attempt to intimidate customers, seed partners and competitors. DuPont™ Optimum GAT soybeans that include the RR1 trait are better products, and we believe our customers should have the right to plant them. On this issue, we will stand with American farmers and fight Monsanto’s efforts to deny them access to competitive products.
“DuPont has been delivering innovation to the marketplace for years, such as Y series soybeans, and we are seeing positive response from farmers. Our pipeline is full of innovative products that will improve productivity of the world’s farmers, and we think it’s only appropriate that farmers can see some new options that can benefit them.
“We are disappointed Monsanto chose litigation and inflammatory public statements over civil discourse. The lawsuit incorrectly claims that Pioneer and DuPont may not combine (“stack”) the innovative Optimum GAT trait with any soybeans already containing a Roundup Ready trait. Monsanto’s so-called “stacking” restriction is one of many practices that Monsanto engages in to limit the availability of competitive products. In 2008, the U.S. Department of Justice required that Monsanto abandon similar “stacking” restrictions it imposed on its licensees producing Roundup Ready cottonseed as a condition to its acquisition of cotton seed company Delta & Pine Land.
“It is DuPont’s belief that competition in the seed industry, U.S. growers, and ultimately, consumers, would be best served by a public policy that allows independent seed companies to assemble the best combinations of traits and germplasm for each of their customers. To that end, seed companies should be able to offer combinations of traits and germplasm without restrictions imposed by trait providers that attempt to limit those combinations.”