October ripening is probably too late for milehigh (most years), as it is for me⦠I'm convinced it is best to invest in early ripening varieties and appropriate winter protection for those of us in marginal areas with short growing seasons. I keep balking at the price of getting my winter protection set up and buying the plants, but the varieties other than 'angel red' that I have my eye on are: 'white', 'granada', 'sweet', 'ever sweet', and 'sverkranniy'. However, it kills me every time I see all those cheap 'wonderful' poms for sale everywhere, while any early ripening variety is way more expensive and much more difficult to find!

Since 1995, the term of a plant patent grant in the USA is 20 years from the date of the application. The term used to be 17 years until 1995, at which time it was extended. All patents still in effect at that time were extended to 20 years from the application or 17 years from the date of issuance, which ever was longer. Using google patents is the best way to search patents in the USA. If you have the patent number, reduce to this format: PP1234 PP is plant patent. Remove any leading zeroes. If you know the breeder code, you can also search using that. Using the advanced search feature, you can search INVENTOR using first and last name of the hybridizer. Here is a link that might be useful: How do I figure out if a patent is still in force

Firstly, a quick search shows there are NO patented Passiflora in the US, nor have any patents been filed for any. In the US at least, a plant patent only applies to a single genotype and its identical clones. All seedlings of patented plants are completely free of any restrictions on propagation, provided they are different in any way. Some seedlings are apomictic, which would be identical "clones", and they would still be protected by the patent. Not only can you patent the seedlings as your own, but even a bud sport of a patented variety can be patented as something new, provided it has some observable or measurable difference. You are completely free to do as you wish with your seedlings. Just curious which "sterile" variety it is? ~kiwinut

Hi Rosecandy, yes, I've bred and released roses. No, I haven't patented any. The fees for the paperwork are there on the web site. As you can see from them, it still costs a LOT of money for patent protection. MUCH more than I (or likely you) could expect to recoup from any one variety. A major player such as Week's, Conard Pyle, etc., already has the people skilled in filing the paper work and describing the plants. For them, the costs are similar but they have the people and procedures in place. They also have the pipeline for production and distribution in place so they are much more likely to move the quantity of plants required to make back those costs and produce a profit. What good would it do for either of us to spend $1000 to "protect" a plant when we're likely to sell a few dozen, perhaps even a hundred under great results, because we don't have the advertising, production and distribution channels? Far better to produce something you think worthy and interest a commercial concern in producing it. Yes, it's going to take several years for trial and production and you are best off not providing anyone information about it other than those producing it. Say you produce the white and purple spotted rose and it proves itself worthy of introduction. Say that takes the minimum three years (very fast for something really commercial, but OK for arguement). Perhaps you posted a photo of it here on GW in your enthusiasm and even might have provided the parentage. If that post occurred more than one year from the date you apply for patent protection and it is searchable by the patent office, you are out of luck. Those who are already producing such potentially commercial, potentially worthy of patent roses do not divulge their creations publicly until they are tested and any protection is applied for. Jim Sproul, "daddy" of the Eyeconic Hulthemias, Thrive! and quite a few other very nice roses, only shares photos of and information about progress in his breeding. Anything he feels might be "commercial" is never shared until it has either been found unsuitable or protected and ready for introduction. It is completely safe to make statements such as a particular rose or a particular cross is producing good results, but if that statement contains any information which specifically identifies a specific seedling, you have "publicly introduced" that rose. Yes, that means if a rose is patented, it most likely was raised quite a few years prior to the patent date. You see how much it costs to patent the plant. It can take several years to build enough quantities of a single plant to be able to supply demand. All of that costs quite a bit of money if you're considering a national introduction through an established, commercial producer. Of course no where near what it cost years ago when a J&P might be gearing up to sell many hundreds of thousands of a single variety, but it's still a sizeable chunk of cash. No one is going to gamble that kind of money on a plant until it has been tested in as many conditions and climates as possible and proven itself worthy in major markets. If you're not patenting it, I know of those who have raised a seedling one year and introduced it "commercially" the next. It's the testing and creating the ability to supply many thousands of plants, generating the advertising images and copy, supplying the "pipeline" which takes time and adds costs. Anything which allows that specific rose to be identified postively will start the clock. A seedling number, a test name, images showing something characteristic of that specific rose, anything which could be used like a finger print, can start it. Identifying it as a cross between two parents shouldn't because there can be many thousands of seedlings raised between two roses. But if you say seedling #, code named "xyz" which is a single, pink shrub, then you have "introduced" that rose. That information can specifically identify that exact variety. You have "finger printed" it. Once you publicly post photos of it which can further be used to identify it specifically, you have introduced it. If that specific bloom is contained in a group shot of many seedlings or other plants and not specifically identified by name or number, you're OK because you haven't identified that variety. Bottom line is, unless you are well-heeled and patenting the rose purely out of vanity, an "amateur" is probably better off NOT patenting a plant. You will never recoup the investment unless you can generate and SELL enough plants to cover all of your costs. Kim