GP argues that the farmers would be civilly liable for "allowing" the GM to cross-pollinate over to their fields, even if there's nothing they could conceivably do to prevent it.

I don't see where you are going with the car crash analogy. You are only liable in a car crash if you caused it. The Monsanto case is more like someone suing you because they ran into your parked car.

But there would had to be some kind of negligence on your part for them to win.

How can you be liable if there are no actions taken on your part to create the situation, and no reasonable measures you can take to prevent it?

If the recent events in Japan taught us anything, it's that nuclear power is much safer than most people think.
A major earthquake with a devastating flooding caused some *minor* local contamination; compared to the energy produced during the plants lifetime the damage is insignificant.

The power plant was 40 years old, built on ancient technology. A modern plant would be even safer.

The tipping point is not the point of no return.
The point of no return is the time when it is to late to prevent the tipping point from happening.
Depending on the system in question, there could be a significant time delay between the two.

Se my other reply. Combining old stuff in a new way is also a from of innovation, but Apple is claiming ownership of everything old they polished and combined, that's not right.

From a technical standpoint there is very little innovation in the iphone (new technology). From a product standpoint it is / was innovative, just not on the scale everyone seems to think.

Combining old stuff in a new way can also be an innovation / the result of a innovative process.
BUT it's not the kind of innovation that should lead to a government backed monopoly (patents).

Apple takes more credit and is given more credit than they are due.
Steve was pissed at others for doing the same as they did; combine ideas from several sources. He found that unacceptable when Apple was one of the sources, failing to see that they did the same. That's hypocrisy.

Multitouch and pinch zoom predates the iphone with at least a decade. Apple bought a multi-touch specialist (FingerWorks) in 2005.
Touch frienldy UI? try two decades (IBM Simon)
Proximity sensors? Nokia 7650 in 1997-1998

Apple didn't "innovate" any of this stuff.
They polished old ideas and let their marketing department do the rest.

There was never anything *new* in the iphone.
Apple was/is good at chosing the right stuff to polish and combine, and have a kick ass marketing department.

^^
He was a US citizen.
A US citizen was executed by the US government without trail.
His alleged crime seems to have been protected speech under the 1st amendment.

No.
It Will be gone.