TFA says the potatoes are patented. This one says they are trademarked: <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/international/440773-pepsico-sues-indian-farmers-for-growing-trademarked-potatoes" rel="nofollow">https://thehill.com/policy/international/440773-pepsico-sues...</a> and this one says both trademarked and copyrighted! <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/pepsico-sues-farmers-in-india-for-growing-trademarked-lays-potatoes" rel="nofollow">https://www.thedailybeast.com/pepsico-sues-farmers-in-india-...</a> Can someone confirm what kind of rights PepsiCo is actually asserting in this case?
So they originally stole these seeds, or at least acquired them through some other illicit means, and are now trying to hide behind local laws which allow them to save seeds from one harvest to the next. PepsiCo probably isn't the bad guy here.
It is now offering to settle with the farmers - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/26/pepsico-accused-of-harassment-after-suing-indian-potato-farmers-lays-crisps" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/26/pepsico-acc...</a>