The food chain could be effected as well But the most interesting part in the article is this: IMO this begs 2 questions for the defenders of the status quo. The first would be for those who defend gov't as necessary for the public good and the other would be for those who defend business, especially large scale corp. business as also some kind of public good. But it also begs the question, could big business ever get such without the state in the first place and then if there is not big business, who has the money to buy off the political process and in that does gov't naturally devolve to a more natural small scale and more local controlled participatory democracy? Does gov't in effect not taking such grand central planning economic steps produce it's own natural self limiting capacity on both the state and vulgar capitalism or vulgar free markets if you like? The next question you might consider is if copyright and IP are naturally occurring property rights or are they a created fiction in the same manner a corporation is a person? But do patent protections exist when the patented product are just blown in with the wind? And is this just an isolated corporation gone crazy or have they had partners in this process? There are even rumblings about the backyard gardener who could be next and the scary part of that scenario is the source of the violation of Monsanto's patents is as uncontrollable as pollen in the wind. To the defenders of both big state and big business, who among you is really defending real property rights here? Seems to me in the above situation, both the undying defenders of big gov't and big capitalism both have a serious dilemma in holding their ideals while still appearing the high ground moralist too!