Plant breeders' rights
[4] There is also a provision for compulsory licensing to assure public access to protected varieties if the national interest requires it and the breeder is unable to meet the demand.Both the 1978 and the 1991 Acts set out a minimum scope of protection and offer member States the possibility of taking national circumstances into account in their legislation.Member countries also have the option to require the breeder's authorization with respect to the specified acts as applied to products directly obtained from the harvested material (such as flour or oil from grain, or juice from fruit), unless the breeder has had reasonable opportunity to exercise their right in relation to the harvested material.In 1970 the United States followed the lead of seventeen Western European nations and passed the Plant Variety Protection Act 1970 (US).The WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires member states to provide protection for plant varieties either by patents or by an effective sui generis (stand alone) system, or a combination of the two.India has adopted a plant breeders' rights law that has been rejected by the UPOV Council as not meeting the requirements of the treaty.There have been contrary opinions expressed by both lawyers and scientists assessing the general necessity for the protection of bred plant varieties as a form of intellectual property.Agricultural research and development, for example, has been specified as a particularly demanding endeavor, with respect to immediate concerns for the ability to sustainably feed an increasing global population.[8][14] On the contrary, some believe that a more diverse approach than the imposition of intellectual property rights laws upon new plant varieties is required.[8][7] This counter argument asserts that complex social, cultural, and economic factors affect the nature of intellectual property and its protection.[15][failed verification] Generally, it comes from the belief that communities should have control over their own seed stock, as a means to increase agricultural biodiversity, resilience, and food security.[16] Activists argue that farmers and individuals should have legal protection for the practice for maintaining traditional plant varieties.