It is a complex situation as you point out. I do not think, however, that it is worth the risk of sterilizing crops worldwide for the profits of any company. While this strategy makes business sense, it does not make horse-sense. I would rather that all people be able to grow crops that can regenerate from their own seeds, than to have an improved crop that cannot be grown without buying seed annually from a corporation. What if the farmer has a bad year and has no money to buy more seeds with? Farmers never have made huge profits---until farming became corporate agribusiness. Small farmers feed their families and maybe their communities, but they don't get rich. Perhaps in the future a small farmer will increasingly be able to charge very high rates for small bits of locally grown food--when people are hungry and the corporate supply chain ceases to deliver the foods most of us eat now... My gripe with Monsanto's scheme is that the risk of mass starvation due to sterile crops is too great. To me, this is a short sighted and greedy business practice. Profits are valued more highly in today's markets than future human survival. Something is rotten about that, and Monsanto is certainly not the only offender.