I don't understand the context. The idea of banning seed sharing is to stop counterfeits? That doesn't make much sense. Surely that'll just make it worse, no?

Also, what's the connection to the high yield ones? Is it because those get counterfeited the most?

So you are saying that these special hybrid seeds that are the first generation of combining two strains are the only ones that can perform well? And that using any other seeds, even the second generation of that same strain, is so bad and so easy to confuse that it should be outright illegal?

That is very hard to believe.

EDIT: I see now I was too quick to judge and that my knowledge on the topic was insufficient. Read the excellent comments below , they helped me understand how OP makes sense.

Such laws are in place to protect the IP of these special seed producers, to make their business model viable. That does have merit to a degree, you do want such companies to exist, but they should also have to contend with competition from other, perhaps less effective but cheaper, sources of seed.

This doesn’t have much to do with protecting the farmers from being cheated into planting bad seed. And I am skeptical of the fact that even second generation seeds are that bad, or that these hybrids are really such a life-changing upgrade.

> But seed counterfitting is a real problem that is hurting some of the world's poorest

I'm guessing these hybrid seeds you are talking about are probably the reason for the counterfitting to begin with. I don't imagine them being sold at a reasonable price, but with this law maybe you have less competition?

For some context on why the original law was introduced:

$$$.

You failed to explain why seeds that might fail to make the "best crop possible" would be banned, while leading with a promise to do so. Instead, you explained the concept of "hybrid vigor."

Then you talked about the counterfeiting of seeds by imitating a coating, a concept completely unrelated to a law banning sharing seeds, and unlikely to be hindered by it at all.

Unless I am missing something.

Thats a bs explanation & you know it. Where is the direct corelation between seed sharing and counterfeit seeds? Did you do any studies? Any research to back your claims? Why criminalize a practice that existed well before your companies? Farmers that plant every year cant tell good seeds from bad seeds? What kind of disrespect is that though?

You can look at America to see what happens when seed sharing is outlawed (or made effectively illegal through contracts to acquire seeds that are then ruthlessly enforced.) Neither path is ultimatly friendly to small farmers it seems, so this line of thinking doesn't really hold any water to me.

One reason for running these seed banks is that old fashioned seeds actually work better than hybrids and similar in some areas where climate change is rampant.