As a world class industry herbarium, Canndor’s mission is to document and preserve records of cannabis plants grown in the industry, in order to establish historical evidence of existence, link plant creators with their creation, and establish broader cultivar standards in partnership with the community that stewarded these plants themselves.
I would love to hear what folks think of this.
My thoughts are…
This could be good or this could be bad.
I need to learn more.
Just out of curiosity. You can’t patent stuff that has been in public domain for years can you?
That is what has been said, but proving that is what may be difficult.
@FiveGar is probably more qualified than I am to answer that.
Maybe he will chime in???
This is where I learned of Canndor. thanks to @SleepySails for the video.
They seem to be doing that these days.
Once upon a time, they vetted the applications before granting a patent but now it seems they just grant the patent and if there is contention, let the courts sort it out.
Cheers
G
Leafworks is the one doing the testing in the video.
More on them here…
From the link…
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191113005203/en/LeafWorks-CannabisHemp-Genetics-Company-Launches-Cultivar-Registration-Program.
Such shady fu?ks. Wonder who is going to claim chem, og, diesel, blueberry. All in the public for decades
My IP specialty was copyrights, not patent law, but I did have to take patent law classes . . . More than a decade ago . . .
To be patentable it must be a new thing/techhnique/process that take a “novel step” that differentiates itself from any prior art. A new patent must be novel, non-obvious, and useful. You cannot patent stuff in public domain. You also cannot patent stuff even you yourself have made and have previously sold/exhibited but not patented yet. So, provable or not, if genetics are out there and being sold or exhibited, technically you should have an uphill battle to patent. Even if it would otherwise be patentable. Famous case/precedent was about corsets.
Egbert v. Lippmann - Wikipedia (public use of invention bars patentability)
But a little change in the dna would make it new and novel. How big a change to make it a novel step? Thats what patent examiners and court are for. Even if initially granted you can sue to invalidate a patent on novel grounds and win. Good luck having the pockets to fund such a legal attack against a big company though.
Arguments abound over whether you should be able to patent a genome but currently you can, or could completelty when I studied it. Dont know about the last two years as asked on another thread but monsanto has absolutely sued farmers due to accidental pollenation of the farmers heirloom soybean crop with monsanto pollen/genetics from a farmer next door. Claimed the seeds produced from the unintended breeding were monsanto IP/property if I rememebr properly. Law may have changed since I looked at, as it does, but Monsanto had the legal leverage back then, and used it.
This is fascinating information, thank you @shag for posting it.
While watching the video I could not help but consider each step of the LeafWorks process for archiving a timestamp of a cannabis cultivar in the context of what we do here at Overgrow.
There are loads of us who have worked a specific line of cannabis enough to readily pass all the requirements required for eligibility in this program. Even if there is no intent to proceed in acquiring a patent, or attempt to commercialize your work, the concept of permanently archiving the unique genetics you have created is enticing.
Is there anyone else interested in perhaps creating a “Study Group” to explore the details further, specifically in regards to OG growers? I bet @shag might be willing to coordinate such an effort.
Respectfully Submitted,
-Grouchy 
You guys all know I found/created Kush right? Time to patent that shit 
@TopShelfTrees1 I have your back…LOL
I wonder how many varieties are considered in the public domain?
You know protected from being patented.
If any…
Where would we find such a list? 
If a company goes out of business or decides to go in a different direction like phylos, are these records preserved?
I too would love to know this, this whole concept is crazy to me! We gotta have ownership of everything huh 
All of them?
There are lists of “lines” (read samples) from various projects around the web, most very limited in numbers.
Bigger projects seem to generously publish crumbs investors will allow to be made public.
In one example, hundreds of samples were compared to cannatonic. Big useless dataset 🫤
Another project also has hundreds of samples, none named after the clone or line but series of numbers and letters, rendering the info useless.
We’ll have to trust the breeders syndicate codex LOL
We don’t know.
Any more info on this??
Biotech has a utility patent on breeding and cloning among others 
One word. PHYLOS 
Thanks for the contribution @HolyAngel
That was my first thought.
I did not want to falsely accuse them of being that dirty.
