How can you order a farmer to destroy their trees? I hope he fights in a higher court. Wish I’d heard about the nectarine giveaway. I’d have gone to pick some.
A big part of the problem here is this licensed fruit.
It seems like the guy agreed to grow this fruit that needed to be exclusively licensed or you wouldn’t be allowed to grow it.
He also agreed that the company he licensed the fruit from had exclusive rights to buy and market the fruit.
The company with exclusive rights apparently wasn’t paying for all the fruit that was grown. Unclear why.
The jury ruled that the farmer broke the contract, but there’s so much fucked up about the contract to begin with.
If the company didn’t want the fruit, the farmer should be able to sell it or give it away. They decided NOT to exercise their exclusive rights.
And now the trees will be destroyed because they are unlicensed… What a dumb system.
How do you licence a fucking fruit ? How can you copyright food? Fuck this mf earth
Because of monopolies and corporations, farmers are being pushed out, the only way for some farmers to afford to do it is to use licensing agreements like his.
They license the rights and get a payment up front or a monthly payment to help them with huge initial costs.
For the record it’s a patent, not copyright.
If the company spends considerable amounts of cash developing a genetically modified fruit that is superior in some way, they have the rights to that fruit.
Whatever my man keep eating those copyrighted fruits just remember then they own what you shit as well
Uh… pretty much the entire agriculture industry works this way… Monsanto forces farmers to sign licenses that they won’t use the seeds produced by their crops to grow more crops.
We should remember to save it and ship it to their HQ.
Do you go to work for free? Must be nice.
People have been cultivating fruit way before copyright…
Obviously that’s true. Then this farmer should have planted that older (less desirable) fruit.
The discussion is about how we feel about the state enforcing copyright on fruits. Do we need this as a society? You make it sound like the profit incentive is necessary for farmers developing more resilient, tastier etc. fruit. Historically, the direct profit was enough. We have a choice.
This use of copyright can hinder innovation (it limits knowledge sharing) and has weird inefficiencies like the one in the article. That’s worth debating.
Nah
No, what they have is a morally bereft contract condition.
If you put in effort and money to create a product, you wouldn’t give it away either. If you (or the farmer) thinks the product has no benefit, then don’t use it. Use something else.
Well, the farmer did give away, because he had no other choice after the buyer refused to buy but banned him from selling to anyone else. Sometimes giving away is the only option.
Exclusive rights to something isn’t exactly new. If you have a gym or Costco membership, you can’t just let someone else use it because you won’t be around for a month. If the farmer willingly entered into a contract with the supplier, the terms of the contract are enforceable.
Not exactly the same thing. But any contract that means they can screw you and you have no recourse, is a bad contract that shouldn’t be enforceable. You can’t sell yourself into slavery either. That’s a much closer analogy.
Yeah no. Some things benefit the most capable providers when made public. If you are in that position, it’s only a net benefit to dictate the entire market.
Are you suggesting the government make rules on what kind of contracts parties can make in business? Would the government then oversee that? There are many, many contracts where there is an exclusive relationship described in a contract.
Are you suggesting the government make rules on what kind of contracts parties can make in business
They already do?
He sublicensed the right to sell the fruit back in 2017 but, then signed a marketing agreement with the Fruit company said only they can market and sell it.
His agreements seem to contradict each other.
Lots of people don’t read what they sign. But it’s also shitty of the company to trick him like that.
Read everything you sign. If you don’t understand, get a lawyer to read it.
Licensed? Can I download a nectarine now? These are physical, tangible things. Surely they are simply owned?
From what I understand, a company had exclusive rights to buy them, but didn’t. What’s a farmer to do in that case? Surely the party that promised to buy them but didn’t, is the one that broke contract? Requiring fruit to rot on the trees is utterly unacceptable.
a judge had ruled that his trees had to be destroyed before the trial even began.
The article doesn’t explain the judge’s reasoning for this ruling, and I am struggling to understand why the judge would do this. The whole court case is due to Giumarra Brothers Fruit Company being unhappy that they were not receiving 100% of the nectarines from the trees that they licensed to the farmer. So how does destroying the trees help anyone?
It does seem like it’s just a punishment for being generous.
It’s fine, we’re just over here producing the same absurdities that (much) later result in clumsy-sounding stories like “and then the question became, to whom goes the bigger portion of the baby being split? jk what does the posing and response to the question itself reveal? for fucks sake how bad does this have to be, to stir us or anyone to do differently?”
I guess I added the bit on at the end.
So, seems like we gonna have to guard our food with violence.
You have an orchard unapproved by the komisariat, Farmer. You disrupt the logistical system you see. Perhaps you would like to name few names to make punishment more less harsher, yes?
Edit: bah there is a fair explanation for all of this below. Or above, depending on your point of view.
Amid the battle, Mora chose to give away the nectarines he had grown instead of leaving them to rot.
However, on August 13, a jury at Fresno County Superior Court ruled that the Central Valley farmer did break his contract, although Giumarra was awarded no damages, according to documents obtained by the Fresno Bee.
Mora revealed in a video posted to TikTok that a judge had ruled that his trees had to be destroyed before the trial even began.
this is why they dont want us to own the means of production. all of us are glorified slaves who arent entitled to fucking food.
Bruh, the jury and judge are corrupt and terrible people. We Needs more judges and juries who are against corporate greed
That requires education.
It requires execution. Judges prop up this system and feel they are immune for their judgements. They shouldn’t be, and honestly should be among the first targeted to show that no one is above getting guillotined.
Look I hear you, and I am a bit worried that that type of sweeping mandate tends to cut off more than the intended cuts of meat if you know what I mean.
I do, and it’s an unfortunate side effect. But it’s one that will happen no matter what if things continue as they are. Keep in mind that this system is killing working class folks in various ways. From death due to low wages and thus starvation/homelessness/overwork, death from fraud such as health insurance denying life saving care or suicide from being in so much pain. Then of course you have Flock creating the basis for open air slave pens, and concentration camps to go along with them. Then of course there is the damage to the planet that the system has upheld that is likely to kill an untold amount of people due to crop failures, heat, our main tradewind dying.
All while pedophiles run the world and abscond with our children.
At what point do we start to excise the disease even if some healthy tissue has to be extracted with it?
deleted by creator
You will own nothing, and you will be happy. Until morale improves.
I knew it was gonna be this guy…
He licensed a specific breed of fruit tree, which is about the stupidest thing you can do.
Then he signed a marketing agreement, to only sell to that same company, the same one that he licensed it from. Which is literally the dumbest thing possible, because they have a financial incentive to fuck you over the second they establish their own orchids to meet supply. 100% of theirs will always sell first. With prices set as that as the full supply, yours become emergency backup that quickly rots.
Predictably, they refused like 50% of his crop one year.
Then he sold to someone else, and obviously got sued.
The only people who can legally own the trees now, is the company that sued him. And as he’s very unlikely to want to sell an established orchid to them, or anyone else who would legally have to do business with that company, they have to be destroyed.
The fruit itself, likely ran out incredibly quickly. This was a huge story a couple months ago.
But it’s one thing to do it with crops like wheat and corn that you at least plant every year. Fucking fruit trees live decades. Locking distribution rates without guaranteed sale is just asking to get squeezed out. The company likely planned on buying from him cheap, which again is the reason he’s destroying them.
Predictably, they refused like 50% of his crop one year.
Then he sold to someone else, and obviously got sued.
This shit should be illegal. If they want to lock him in to only selling to them, it should be required that they buy everything he’s produced at an agreed on rate before he does any work.
It’s a private agreement he signed voluntarily after he had the rights to grow and while he could sell to anyone for any price…
It’s legal in the same way I can sell you my house for a dollar, I could do it, but I’d be an idiot.
He didn’t have to sign that, he just did it.
There’s shit that should be illegal no matter how a contract is written. An example that comes to mind is how landlords love to put things in a lease that aren’t legally enforceable.
Then it sounds like you want an authoritarian nanny state…
Which actually isn’t surprising
Pre-emptive edit:
The point being if “unfair” contracts are illegal, then the government is the one saying what contracts are fair.
And a single look in the general direction of the American government, should I dictate why that’s a bad plan.
The most likely result, is the rich abuse it, and suddenly “fair” just means “fuck over the poors”.
That is not what an authoritarian nanny state is. He wants a system where people don’t get screwed by contractual abuse with no way out. It’s entirely reasonable for a state to protect against abuse.
Huh? There are no contracts at all without a state.
Whether or not a contract is “fair” has absolutely nothing to do with legality.
If I want to sell you my house for a $1, then that’s legal.
If you manipulate me, or coerce me, not legal.
That is how it is supposed to work.
If I can’t sell you my house for $1, what price will the state let me sell?
$1k? 10k? 100k?
What happens when there’s a market crash and the state doesn’t want to acknowledge by letting homes sell for less?
What about the other way? What if they say 100k is too much and no matter what my house can only be sold for 10k? Do you think that would be a land of cheap houses or do you realize it would quickly lead to only rentals ever being available and shit benefits from property taxes while landlord income skyrockets?
And I know, a one time sale of a house isn’t the same as contracted selling of a crop…
But trust me, this is easier to explain and pretty much the same thing.
Hell, I grew tobacco growing up, and like most crops the government will buy pretty much anything at below market price exactly for stuff like this. It’s a hugely important part of being any kind of farmer to know about this program
I don’t expect any of you to know anything about that
But a guy buying an orchard should.
And anyone signing any sort of sales and distribution deal, needs a lawyer.
If it’s exclusive you need the most lawyer you can afford
Contracts are meaningless without the state as an enforcement mechanism. The state has an interest in contracts, which it defines in like, ‘contract laws’. These laws put superseding constraints on contracts. I understand, that in the case of this farmer, no laws may have been broken. What I’m saying is that there could (and perhaps should) be such a law. Just like in a residential lease, the landlord can’t override legal protections.
As painful as it is, this is true. Consumer protection protects consumers. Businesses are expected to do their own due diligence.
Trying to regulate this away will just encourage contract lawyers to be even more convoluted in their language.
Unfortunately a lot of people get burnt when they cross the line from consumer to business world and don’t take on the due diligence aspect.
Basically, better education is needed on this, rather than government oversight. Regulatory capture would rapidly make it a stick to beat smaller businesses with otherwise.
They already need to get a business license…
They’re already going thru multiple state and federal steps and forms to establish themselves as a business…
Like, the end road all these people are walking down, is a “test” to see if someone is “smart enough” to be allowed to run a business
I’m fucking terrified about the future, covid really fucked up everyone’s IQs somehow. Right/left, doesn’t matter. Critical thinking has basically disappeared since 2020. Everyone is just running on vibes and historically that means they’re being manipulated by the oligarchs again.
People need to actually start thinking, but they just refuse to.
I personally think it’s data overload. The disruption of COVID pushed a lot of people over the edge. They went into a mental lockdown. Rather than filtering on importance, they instead filtered on whole topics.
It’s worth noting that the right, in most countries, shifted to a gish-gallop information mentality. This happened around the same time as COVID (though the build up started before e.g Brexit). For those able to rapidly filter, it’s just really annoying. To those who relied on authority to filter, it’s devastating.
It’s the same method as “brave new world” talked about. Swamp important information in a storm of noise.
Nah man, it’s deeper…
And to be clear, it’s not that I haven’t seen it to similar degrees in myself. It’s just (and believe me or not, I can’t/wont prove it) my IQ before all this shit was higher than a normal IQ test could measure. Anything over 145 needs a more specific test, and my most recent one was like 2012 and I beat that threshold.
And I’m not where I was before COVID, and I didn’t even fucking test positive for covid at any point. There could be other reasons for me personally, but again, it’s fucking everyone.
It legit feels like we all had a substantial drop in IQ. And again, can’t/won’t prove it, but I spent a few years working with the special needs population, ranging from high 60s IQ and barely noticable, to completely non verbal and me changing adult diapers.
Everyone is acting substantially less intelligent than pre-covid. Not saying COVID did it, even though we always heard of neurological lasting effects like long COVID and brain fog. It’s possible it’s lack of socialization and that stuff…
But bro…
I really think the COVID brain fog never went away, I think we all got it to some extent, and just got used to it and stopped remembering what it used to be like.
And this is reflected in the standardized testing of gen z and alpha, it’s a legit and measurable thing, although I think the fact that we only teach for standardized testing isn’t just contributing to this, it’s hiding it. If scores are bad now when standardized test scores are the only priority…
The metrics are hiding how bad the problem really is.
We’re cooked, it’s not a quick fix, people can’t just pay attention and instantly be better. It’s gonna take years/decades to dig us out of this. I just fucking hope it’s not happening globally
I know about the brain fog. I was working in china when it started. I got an early dose, before it started to mellow. I’m also up at the extreme IQ wise (as well as a good example of the difference between “smart” and “capable”)
I don’t think mass brain fog is the main cause however. The very structure of society began to crack. The status it’s stabilized in is so much worse for our cognitive health. We passed a tipping point where negativity became the dominant mindset.
Gen Z and gen alpha had their education massively disrupted. The cascade damage from that is only going to compound for a generation or 2. Disentangling the various factors is difficult to say the least.
He didn’t have to sign that, he just did it.
Or maybe he was coerced, or didn’t have any other options, or trusted the company was going to give him a fair shake. Maybe he is an idiot. That doesn’t mean that corporations with millions to spend on lawyers should be able to destroy peoples livelihoods because they can throw more money at the legal system. The law is supposed to protect everyone. And destroying perfectly good food on top of that?
Or maybe he was coerced,
Then it’s illegal and not valid…
Or didn’t have any other options,
What? He could have sold to anyone, and signed an exclusive distribution contract…
He had every other option and threw them all away
or trusted the company was going to give him a fair shake.
Then he’s a fucking idiot…
And destroying perfectly good food on top of that?
How the fuck are you this deep in this thread and still think food was destroyed?
The fruit itself, likely ran out incredibly quickly. This was a huge story a couple months ago.
Like, just in general, I’m not going to keep explaining the same shit, when you’re clearly not understanding this. I don’t even think you’re reading these comments.
Literally the first line of the fucking article:
A California farmer has been ordered to destroy his fruit orchard after giving away thousands of pounds of free food.
From the other article:
Under the agreements, Mora was to pay Giumarra a royalty of $2.50 per tree and a 4% production royalty based off the gross sales of the fruit the trees produced, as well as a sales commission.
“They sold me hope and a big dream that I thought I could participate in with them," he said.
Mora alleges that up to half of the nectarines he provided to Giumarra in 2020 were thrown away, reducing his profits. The company disputes this, and the judge overseeing the case found that the statute of limitations for those claims had passed.
They fucked him.
And he didn’t have other options, this kind of fruit is patented (also bullshit) and he had to sign on with this packer. Trees take years to grow, he can’t just switch over to another one at the drop of a hat.
Yes and manufacturing and mining occupations volunteered to work in horrible conditions before they were regulated. They had a choice. They could have just not worked those jobs. What idiots. /s
Predictably, they refused like 50% of his crop one year.
They should have been obligated to purchase all of the crop produced to match the restriction on who he could sell to.
That’s the gotcha. It’s exactly how the judge should have ruled, but that’s what common sense would say, and contract law doesn’t require the contract to adhere to any kind of common sense.
It’s the kind of hole in a contract I’d have expected any competent contract attorney to catch, but perhaps the farmer didn’t use one, which is unfortunate.
Business to business contracts isn’t like consumer contracts, if it’s not in the contract there’s very little protect you
The farmer, or rather his lawyer, didn’t think ahead enough to get that in the contract. Any experienced futures lawyer would have made sure of it.
Hopefully the guy has crop insurance. Or the court rules to make the company pay to cut the trees down. Ideally also gets him some extra money to get a new crop going.
No, he’ll never farm again. All the fruit he would have grown for people, is gone forever, thanks to this scumbag company.
“This isn’t going to destroy me, but I’ll tell you this, I’m not going to farm anymore,” he said. “I can’t farm in an industry where a company can treat their growers this way and literally use the legal system to punish them.”
I mean, scumbag licensing terms, yeah, but also why did he agree to them?! It’s like someone advertising a free kick in the nuts, saying “sure, lemme get that”, and then calling them a scumbag for kicking you in the nuts.
Likely a clash of cultures. Farming traditionally has a reputation aspect. They often rely on each other to deal with problems quickly. A handshake deal “of course we will buy your full crop” is almost sacrosanct between farmers. To a big company however, the contract is all. If it’s not in the contract it never has any meaning.
Unfortunately, the law is geared to the contract. Also, companies are expected to do their own due diligence. They can put whatever terms they want in a contract. Consumer protection is intended for when consumers can’t get every contract read through by a lawyer. It just doesn’t apply to business-to-business deals.
I watched a documentary about these agricultural practices.
Taking the deal is not always about being dumb, i don’t know about this specific case but farmers are under immense pressure to accept deals from these corporations who often hold real local power.
You will sell your farm or get bullied into complacency.
Do you remember the name of the documentary? I’m always on the hunt for good ones I haven’t seen.
It think it was a television broadcast of a current affairs journalism type of show. I don’t think its available online, sorry :(
No worries, I appreciate you replying!
It’s still quite arguable that this is a predatory agreement, designed to simply cut competitors. There’s not simply an infinite limit to how much you can sign away in a contract. Since farmers often have to operate independently, and there’s a (not always undeserved) mistrust of lawyers, it makes sense they’d have to consider some agreements without representation present.
You would assume a degree of sophistication form someone who owns a multi-million-dollar farming operation. It’s not like it’s a mobile phone contract.
…is just asking to get squeezed out.
Juiced, if you will.
And then in court, beaten to a pulp.
Orchid is a flower, orchard is the word you’re looking for.
Yeah man…
There’s now way autocorrect would have done that, clearly people don’t know which of these is which
I mean, I wasn’t being shitty about it, it was misused twice, so I’m trying to be helpful. Just helping op to differentiate. If they’re swipe texting, it’s a slightly different movement, too.
There’s now way
*no way
There’s now way autocorrect would have done that
Bullshit. My autocorrect changes the most random ass shit sometimes, like I’ve had basic words like “if” get changed to “of” occasionally while I’m typing for seemingly no reason. I wouldn’t trust it enough in general to make a claim like that.
Thanks.
I was wondering why people were down voting me, it’s because I didn’t put /s
Usually sarcasm is relatively obvious but the number of grammar/typo nazis on fedi is still too damn high
Well, I’d like to say that my account being the same account who got corrected would have been enough to indicate that out of literally anyone, I am the one person that would know which word I meant to type…
And that’s why I could skip the “\s”
But here we are, I’m overestimating people and the \s is always required.
You want people to read usernames and actually follow a conversation before popping off in the comments?? ;)
I admit I came in hot bc as an English major and grammar nerd, pedants really chap my ass.
Thank you for this informational and well explained post!
So what’s the guy thinking when he signs these terrible deals? It may be the wrong thing to do but he’s thinking something at the time he does it, right? I don’t buy facile explanations like “he’s dumb” or “because capitalism.”
Because the company probably promised him the moon, telling him “you don’t have to worry about finding buyers or selling at farmers markets, just sell all of your product to us in one lump sum!”
You know how great a deal that is? What he didn’t expect is the fine print of them growing their own supply, and then prioritizing selling theirs while half of his crop goes to waste, un-bought, rotting, and all of a sudden his income just got cut in half because of this scumbag company. So what does he do? He sees that it’s going to happen again, so he sells the original company all the fruit they would have taken, and a small amount to other sources. Because that’s half his freaking income. And the company? Of course, they would rather the fruit spoil and rot, instead of another company or another person at a farmers market selling “their” fruit, that they never paid for but “licensed” in that shitty deal they got him to sign.
It’s bullshit, it’s immoral, there goes another farmer, and his farm, from this earth. You’ll never be able to buy his fruit again.
It was referenced as a “marketing contract” so it’s possible he just legitimately didn’t know it was in there, but he’s still an idiot for signing contracts without a lawyer even if that was the case.
But I mean, a con job is short for a confidence job.
Dude got manipulated one way or another, same way trump can still somehow hire lawyers and other employees despite decades of openly not paying them.
Usually by exploring greed. They likely made it sound like a favor to him and they didn’t normally do it for just anyone.
This is fair and I withdraw my former outrage.
Still tho.
Why you right escape clauses, requirements to purchase, minimum prices that are based on yearly market value, and say first right to purchase and not exclusive.
It amazes me how badly so many contracts are written. There are enough horror stories online that you almost shouldn’t need a business lawyer to help with the stipulations.
The problem is that these rich corporations and billionaires have so much money and power, it doesn’t matter if they get the perfect contract with all the clauses. They’ll break it, and if you go after them in court? They’ll destroy your life. They’ll hire the best lawyers, they’ll stretch the case out for years, and even if you win? You’ll never see a dime. And all the time that case is going on you’re not allowed to sell any fruit or make any money, and you’re just hand-wringing and driving yourself into an early grave with anxiety.
You cannot win in a court case against money like that. The rich can afford more justice than you can.
“This isn’t going to destroy me, but I’ll tell you this, I’m not going to farm anymore,” he said. “I can’t farm in an industry where a company can treat their growers this way and literally use the legal system to punish them.”
Locking distribution rates without guaranteed sale is just asking to get squeezed out.
vibe.
Yeah, the amount of predatory BS that goes unchecked in our food systems is simply amazing. God bless the MBAs.
I’d be curious to see exactly what the judge ordered for destruction. With fruit trees (some, maybe not all- i’m not an arborist) you can cut the tree down and graft onto suckers or bark inlay to get a new fruit tree. For an established orchard this would probably be way better and would fix the awful licensing problem, but given how awful everything about this story is they probably demanded the orchard be burned down and salt sown in the earth.
Mora says that around half of the nectarines provided to Giumarra by him in 2020 were thrown away. That, he alleged, cut into his profits.
I don’t think this is an open and shut case. There’s got to be some bullshit in the contract about minimum quality thresholds and mandatory order volumes.
Although most likely the minimum is “fuck you, you should have read the contract properly”
Trickle down economy?
This is just a story of two greedy profit chasing parties fighting with each other. Fuck em both.
One of them gave stuff away for free and clearly hates food waste. It’s not hard to see which side is the good side here.
That person signed onto a rare and exclusive contract to produce a specific food item. The contract was designed specifically to create rarity for that item so they could control the price and artificially raise it. He was fine with destroying food up until he felt like he didn’t get paid enough. His giving away the food was an act of spite, not generosity. He only did it to get back at the company he signed the contract with. This is not a good person.
