The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

328 the world according to monsantoapproved for consumption or planting; the contamination, which came fromfield tests conducted on a Louisiana farm between 1998 and 2001, affectedthirty countries, led to a collapse in American rice exports, and resulted in“losses of up to $253 million from food-product recalls in Europe.” 21“We are involved in various intellectual property, biotechnology, tort, contract,antitrust, employee benefit, environmental, and other litigation,claims, and legal proceedings and government investigations.” 22 This is accordingto Monsanto’s 2005 10-K form, under the heading “Litigation andOther Contingencies.” Under the heading of “Legal Proceedings,” the firmenumerates, in a catalogue worthy of Prévert or perhaps Kafka, all the lawsuitsin which it is a party, either as plaintiff or defendant. 23 Some proceedingspit it against its competitors, the Swiss Syngenta, the German Bayer, orthe American Dow Chemical Company, over “who is the first to have discoveredone or another gene or active principle.” Similarly, the Universityof California filed a complaint against Monsanto for violation of a patentcovering bovine growth hormone. One also finds that Syngenta has filed anantitrust claim asserting that Monsanto holds a monopoly on glyphosatetolerantcorn seeds. Reuters has wondered: “Monsanto Co.’s domination ofthe biotech crop market is indisputable, but is it illegal?” 24Says Marc Brammer: “The danger hanging over Monsanto is the samethat once threatened Microsoft. It’s not impossible that the company willone day be found guilty of violating American antitrust and antiracketeeringlaws. If that were to happen, it would be very costly.” In 1999, a class actionhad been brought by farmers in federal court in St. Louis, claiming that thecompany had conspired with Pioneer Hi-Bred to fix the prices of seeds at avery high level. But the claim was dismissed in 2003 by Judge RodneySippel, the same judge who was so severe against farmers accused of violatingMonsanto patents. 25One year later, the New York Times published a very detailed investigationin which, after interviewing dozens of executives of seed companies, the paperconfirmed the suspicions of conspiracy hanging over the world leader inGMOs. Among other things, Monsanto had asked Mycogen, a Californiaseed company, “not to compete with Monsanto and its partners on the priceof biotech seeds in exchange for access to some of Monsanto’s patentedtechnologies, according to former executives” of the company (since acquiredby Dow Chemical). 26 These allegations were later repeated in four-