I disagree. In my opinion, the IP issues are merely an attempt to move the goalpost, so that anti-science becomes the much more reasonable anti-corporation. For example, the Honeycrisp apple used to be patented. The patent expired, but in that time the breeding program was able to recoup their costs and make enough to develop new varieties, such as the fabulous SnowSweet. Who complained? No one, that's who, because the system worked, and GMOs weren't involved. Now Monsanto patents a variety of soy, which I might remind you goes off patent before the end of this year, uses that money to produce new things like DroughtGard, a drought tolerant corn (assuming that works, independent data not yet in), and that's bad? They have a monopoly you say? Tell that to BASF, Syngenta, Dow Agrosciences, Pioneer, Bayer Cropscience, Vilmorin, and all the other small seed companies. Of course, given that less that 2% of the population is actively connected to agriculture, are you really surprised that we don't have a huge number of companies? Hell, everyone owns computers and there's really only two major companies selling operating systems so I'd say the seed world is doing pretty damned good.
I'm tired of defending them (if I was into that I could easily be working for them and be living much nicer than I do now), but I wish people would stop with the bullshit about them. Plant patents are good. Sorry, you might not agree that the people improving the plants that help make your lifestyle possible deserve to make a living themselves, but they do. You think plant breeding is easy? You think genetic engineering is simple? It isn't! Ever had a pluot? Ever had a really nice watermelon or ear of sweet corn? Years of someone's dedicated effort went into that. You want to attack Monsanto? Fine, whatever, go ahead, but try to stick to the real and the rational.