Sure seems like a poor business move to me.

Jeri

Well, I guess most sales are garden-center sales, except to us hard-core folks here. My own shopping habit is to make the main buy from a single mail-order source each year, and it won't be DA. So if they are the only mail-order source, I am less likely to buy a DA rose.

And if they are only on Dr. Huey rootstock, I will be less likely to buy a DA rose. Very, very bad move, IMHO.

Maybe we need to do a Boston Tea Party for those snotty English types...

lagomorphmom:

Were you asking about "Jubilee Celebration"? I know that is licence to JP and they only sell it online. Maybe licensees all demanded to have a exclusive roses and DA does not want to grant them one of his better roses.

Are there any other DA's that are exclusive to other growers?

FJ

"Licensing"in this usage confers the right to propagate (for a fee) patented varieties-- not just "exclusives."

"Licensing"in this usage confers the right to propagate (for a fee) patented varieties-- not just "exclusives."

I am curious.

I wonder, does Austin USA sell wholesale to nurseries?
Or are all of their sales retail/mail-order to private parties?
And if they do both, which accounts for the bulk of their sales?

If the former, they may do OK with this move.
If the latter, they may have a problem.

Jeri

It's the canner who sells to the garden center. The producer might set up regional canning operations, or might contract with independent canners, or might sell their bareroots wholesale to anybody who wants to can them. We've all seen DA roses in garden centers with distinctive pots and tags, where the canning evdently had some kind of controlled relationship with DA. No doubt they have a plan to replace the garden center market for DA roses grown by Weeks etc.

@WantToGarden, no, I was asking about one that they haven't had in production for several years.

But no matter who pots them up, they're STILL growing on virused Dr. Huey rootstock, right?
Given that, I don't think I'd touch them with a ten-foot pole.

Of course, I suppose it's easy for me to say.
We went through our Austin phase almost 20 years ago, and we wouldn't re-visit it.
But -- this situation makes it a certainty that they don't have a rose I'd want badly enough
to accept the virus as the price of growing the rose.

These days, there are better options.

Jeri

I went to a Antique Rose farm in an area where I used to live. They used to carry LOTS of Austins....today they had dozens of J and P roses and hardly any Austins left. I felt bad for them. What will these type of places do?

Zyperiris,
Those places have probably already looked at their bottom lines. Either all the Austins they had sold out already, or they had cut back on their purchase last fall/December when they ordered Austins.
They'll continue to carry plants that they 'know' will sell. That doesn't bode well for impulse buyers with a bit of plant discovery lust, but proven success trumps unknowns.
One of the Canadian makers of Austin plants had a huge unsold inventory of Austins that they had had to pay Austin for (since they had to pay so much per plant budded sold-or-not where Weeks only had to pay only for the plants that Weeks sold.) This probably means we'll see fewer Austins from them, or only small or nil production of the ones we don't hear a lot about. This particular maker of Austins is both a wholeseller and a retailer who has already felt the pinch.

I see fields of bland ahead.

In the past this place never had J and P roses there. I do not remember ever seeing one.

Among the threads I tend to ignore are those with subject lines referring to a specific Austin or to Austins in general. However, this one's been bobbing around on page 1 for so long, and has generated so much comment that curiosity finally forced me to find out what all the hubbub's about.

The fact that I'm not a fan doesn't prevent me from acknowledging that David Austin is an international phenomenon -- one that baffles me, but a phenomenon nevertheless. Regarding this recently unveiled marketing ploy, it is, IMO, naive to maintain that David Austin LTD is embarking on an unwise business course. Things that are of concern to rose fanatics like us -- rose mosaic virus and the virtues of own-root over grafted plants, for instance -- are things that are of no consequence whatsoever to the vast majority of the rose-buying public. Mr Austin and his corporate minions know that. They're in business to turn a profit. In pursuit of that goal, they have succeeded quite handsomely and these new marketing strategies will help ensure that they continue to do so. Crazy like a bunch of foxes.

He-he-he-he-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!

So David wants to play rough and dictate to the nurseries. Good luck Mister Roadcoat. There are PLENTY of older cultivars to buy and try own root. And I will name them, and propagate, as I please. Just five more years until the patent on AUSMOL expires...

The sinfully fragrant "FREE Jessica" by Celeste.
{{gwi:267813}}

Here is a link that might be useful: Free Jessica!

I received confirmation from Rene Schmitz at Palatine that this doesn't extend into Canada ("business as usual for Candadian nurseries"). Palatine is, however, slashing their DA offerings for next year down to only five simply because they're not moving too well. If they get enough feedback, they will again expand their offerings.

Do I really want to get invovled in this thread??? Hmmm... OK, here goes.

I noted this thread in early June soon after it was posted and had a quick read at that time. Its persistance has caused me to read it and the "Free Jessica" link posted by Patrick in detail over the past few days with great interest.

It is interesting to see the differing views on what the Austin organization is doing in the US and the speculation surrounding it. I also think that it is important to realize that much of what has been posted on this thread is just that, speculation, sometimes colored by emotion.

Most of those posting are American, so it is understandable that the speculation is about removal of older varieties from the American market to promote newer ones. From my perspective here in Canada, this does not appear to be the case. Why????

1) Because the two large licensed Canadian growers of David Austin roses, Pickering and Hortico, both are still listing many of the older David Austin Varieties. Pickering lists 99 varieties and Hortico has 155 listings, though Hortico very often does not have all they list in stock. Both companies still show on their catalogues that they will ship most of these varities to the US, including Pretty Jessica, Constance Spry, The Reeve, Wife of Bath, Emmanuel and many other "superceded varieties" that many fanciers want. D.A.R. has the legal right to prevent this if they in fact did desire to remove these roses from commerce in the US market.

Joel Schraven at Pickering Nurseries, told me several years ago that D.A.R. sometimes asks them to remove certain roses they sell from their list, primarily because D. A. considers them inferior and unfit for commerce. In addition, Pickering state on their website, that poor sales of a specific variety is one of the factors that may result in removal of that variety from the catalogue by Pickering themselves.

2) Because David Austin Roses in the UK still lists and ships many of the older varieties themselves. D. A.'s UK operation will also ship the older varieties they list internationally.

3) David Austin Senior, has the following to say about his earlier English Roses in his book, "The English Roses,Classic Favorites and New Selections", at page 238:

"Over the last half-century that we have been breeding and introducing new varieties of the English Roses, it is inevitable that some of these would be superseded and that better ones would take their place. Many of the the roses that have been removed from our main list have their virtues, even if they also have certain weaknesses...

...But there is also the fact that some of these roses do extremely well in climates other than Britain and if for no other reaon than this, we do not like to lose them. There are also people who collect all of our roses. For all these reasons and also for the fact that many of them are "old friends", we are loath to let them go..."

I also recall reading an inteview with David Austin Senior somewhere a few years back, where he referred to his roses as being a bit like children and that he had great affection and sentimental attachment to all of them. Yes David Austin is the founder of a large corporation, but he is also a great rosarian, a gifted hybridizer, and most imprtantly a lover of roses. His nursery after all, along with Graham Stewart Thomas, did and does play a lead role in collecting old and rare roses and making them available in commerce worldwide.

From my perspective north of the border, and this is speculation, it appears that there is a restructuring of how David Austin Roses markets roses with its US licensees. All of those details are not yet known. At the same time, the two large Canadian licensees appear to be continuing to offer older varieties for sale to US customers. This may be in fact good news, in that if orders for some of the rarer varieties must be made to fewer licensed vendors, then the variety is more likely to be economically viable for them to produce and keep in stock.

So, the good news is that Pretty Jessica is free and thriving in Canada. She also apparently has a passport, green card, and other documentation necesary :0) and will be allowed to cross the border if US fanciers wish to give her a home.

I for one am a great fan of Mr. Austin. His roses are what got me into this lunatic hobby in the first place, and many of his roses are some of the few repeat blooming roses that will grow and thrive in my harsh climate. But as we all know rose tastes and rose performance are particular to the fancier and to the climate. The important thing is that we are able to acquire the roses we desire, or that will perform for our specific conditions. I believe that Mr. Austin is definitely down with that. I do not believe that his love of money is equal to his love of roses. He is in fact one of the fortunate creative few who have followed their bliss and succeded mightily because of their vision, passion and talent.

I plan to make a stop at Pickering on a trip to Toronto the week after next and may screw up my courage to enquire about what this all means north of the border. That is my "speculative foray" into the fray for what it is worth.

Cheers, Rideau Rose Lad

This is nothing new. Twenty years ago, Austin contracts with at least American producers stated that IF they wished to sell the current, new offerings, they had to guaranty they would not produce/sell any "superceeded" varieties. In Austin-speak, "superceeded" means roses for which they could not obtain patents, therefore royalties.

Horico introduced the English Rose to the Western market. Hortico offered all of the original Austin roses long before any American producers took notice of them. Austin pretty much ignored the American market until the grass roots movement brought them to public notice. Clair Martin of The Huntington and Sharon VanEnoo, former volunteer for The Huntington, grew all of them, wrote about them, spoke tirelessly all over Southern California about them. Nurseries began getting increasingly greater numbers of calls for them and the market took off. For a long time, if you wanted an Austin rose, you brought it in from Hortico, who never had any contractual agreements with Austin to sell his creations. Actually, none were legally needed as there were no patents on Austin creations in the US nor Canada. Once the Austin machine began to notice they were known here, it was too late to patent many of the greats from the early years as they had been in the public domain too long. The only thing they could do was trademark the names such as Heritage, Tamora,Perdita and all the others of that vintage. This is why Vintage Gardens offers so many of the older English roses under their AUS code names. Austin couldn't demand royalty payment for the sale of the plants, but he DID demand payment for selling them under their commercial names. Those varieties can be sold without royalty payment under any name except the original commercial names. Otherwises, there is no benefit to trademarking the names.

This is a conflict between the European and American business philosphies. Traditionally, if the product isn't legally protected, we sell it without asking and without paying for it. Legally, this is OK. Per discussions with friends who deal with European breeders, their tradition is if you wish to offer their creation, you are honor bound to ASK for permission and work out royalty agreements before producing and selling it. Being American, and an amateur breeder who has roses in the market, some offered by those with whom I've NEVER spoken, I can understand both sides. Legally, in America, you have the right to produce and sell any variety of plant which is not protected. European honor dictates you will ask permission and not offer it if you can't reach an agreement. American culture and the Internet have resulted in our not respecting intellectual property rights, whether it's for music, literature, programming, art, roses, etc.

Many of the early Austin roses were, and continue to be some of the best for Southern California gardens and continue to have good demand. Since Austin couldn't control who sold those roses, nor collect any royalties for their sales, he did the next best thing, he tried, and continues to try to destroy the demand for them and replace them with "superior", newer varieties for which he can and does collect royalty payments. Yes, some of the newer roses do have improved characteristics and health, but not all of them. His advertising is much the traditional American hype..."newer is by virtue of being new, better". Diminish the older, non paying varieties by deeming them "inferior" and hype the newer, paying ones as superior, and superceeding the older ones. Very smart marketing.

I agree the original thread is likely a misunderstanding of that marketing philosophy, only those who promise not to sell the unpatented roses will be permitted to sell the new, "improved" ones.

Syl Arena complained of this years ago. He turned down a contract with Austin in favor of selling Tamora and a few others because he felt them superior for our Southern California gardens, and he hated the manipulation Austin tried then, and continues to wield in the American market.

I repeatedly heard through the 1990s, Austin's common practice was to limit which new introductions were allowed to be offered by each introducer. Each was only permitted a limited number of the new varieties so they could have exclusive introductions, thereby bolstering the higher prices for exclusivity. Should Arena wish to offer the rose J&P had "the exclusive" on, further licensing rights had to be contractually arranged, thereby increasing the royalties Austin could demand.

Rideau Rose Lad, it's good to hear that 'Pretty Jessica' is free and thriving in Canada. Is she free and thriving on her own roots (I don't buy grafted roses) and available to someone in Texas? If so, that would be a very good development.

Roseseek, there's a lot of good info in your comments. Thank you for sharing that with us.

Randy

I am providing the new home for five wonderful baby Pretty Jessica roses, purchased from Heirloom...on their own roots. So far, she's just a GREAT rose! Also, I'd like to mention another rose nursery that bears exploring. Burlington Rose Nursery. Everything I've read about this nursery is positive, and the communication of the owner, Burling Leong, is wonderful. She knows what she is doing, and has a pretty amazing selection of roses. I have a Spring 2010 order coming from her, and can hardly wait!

Roseseek, I disagree with you on two counts.

It was Wayside and their luscious catalog of the day (not Hortico...who lives up to the first syllable of their name) who made the market for Austin's in the US. John Elsley was a good friend of David Sr. and established Wayside as the 'agent' of Austin for America.

Unfortunately, they didn't know squat about being agents and lost the patentability to the early Austin varieties. That's why may of his earliest and best are only protected by the trademark on the name (Mary Rose, Graham Thomas, etc.)

Austin lost thousands in the US (and many other countries) from this mistake. Wayside was thrown out as the agent but the stock was virused by then.

This is NOT a move to control the production of the few non-patented, non-trademarked older varieties. It's nothing more than a projection of their desire to control their own market and pricing from the earlier mistake.

The bottom line is...get ready to pay a lot more for any Austin. They are greedy and will take every penny possible.

Amandahugg, we're not really disagreeing here. While Wayside was the initial Austin agent here, Hortico was where The Huntington and all of the SoCal rose nuts (at least those affiliated with that institution, and the ones I knew and socialized with in those years) obtained their roses. I resisted them for many, many years because I hated/hate the hype and the premium they commanded and continue to command. I have always wanted to grow what no one else had so I could enjoy visiting other peoples' gardens and to have them want to see what I grew. Plus, where I gardened until recently was mid desert (Santa Clarita Valley) and every English rose that came down the pike was the same color....beige. They all faded to exactly the same awful color in that intense heat and light. For a number of years it honestly seemed in that environment that the primary difference between this year's and last year's latest, greatest was a petal or two.

Wayside had a half dozen of the things each year. Hortico had a few dozen. John Elsley was/is a very nice guy. I met him a few times at Huntington Old Rose Symposiums and thoroughly enjoyed him.

I agree with you that they are managing their profits by supporting those roses which make them money. That is, after all, the function of business and a good businessman. We don't disagree on the second point. We are saying the same thing...they prefer not to have the non revenue generating varieties bask in the desirabiliy of being "an English Rose" and dilute their profits. Who in their position wouldn't? However, by their contractual demands, they ARE (or trying to) manipulating the market and production of specific varieties. Perdita, Tamora, Heritage, Lucetta, English Elegance, Belle Story, Cymbaline, Claire Rose, RedCoat and a number of others lend themselves to wonderful landscape use here. Tamora and Perdita are excellent garden and landscape bushes in many of our areas. Both have been "superceeded" and both have been previous contract subjects to not be produced if the supplier wanted to offer the new, advertised varieties. That IS manipulation as well as protecting their profits.

I've now been around enough of them to know the handful I wish to grow and work with. Fortunately, all but one are older, unpatented varieties and I already have them. It saddens me to see the collapse of the horticultural market, loss of suppliers and contraction of selection in roses as well as nearly all other product types. I do enjoy seeing well grown English Roses, but have never felt they were, as early advocates here promoted them as being, the ultimate expression of rosedom.

As for Burlington Roses, I can't recommend her too highly! Burling did the pollenating, budding and numerous other functions at Sequoia Nursery for 35 years. She and Carolyn Supinger ran that nursery from front to back and back again. They did it all while Mr. Moore got to plan, play and dream. The nursery moved on their backs and they both learned WELL. Check out her list on Help Me Find. It's amazing. If you're close enough, check out the restored rose gardens at Hearst Castle. All of those tree roses Burling created. The requirements were they all had to be fragrant, Hybrid Teas, prior to Hearst's death, so prior to 1951, I think, and all had to be produced on 36" trunks. They were installed, ahead of schedule, a year ago April. Now, she is working on producing other roses to recreate and restore the Hearst Castle gardens. She's an excellent rose producer, a wonderful horticulturist and a very dear, long time friend. Her selection is very much the spiritual continuation of the old, rare and unusual roses Sequoia had. She's also doing some of her own breeding with some very interesting results. She won't add varieties to her HMF list until she actually has plants available, so check back often. You're going to see some pretty neat things appear on her list.

DAs roses have proven to be so climate specific, and so prone to unattractive fading where I live, as mentioned above, that I won't buy a recently introduced variety at all. I want it to have been grown in the USA for at least a decade before I decide if it might work in my yard.

I do think the DA company has bee ill-served by some of its American distributers. I am thinking specifically of J&P, which has continued to promote its this rose will work for any climate hype merely because that is what is easy for them. I know gardeners who won't have anything to do with English Roses because of their experiences with cultivars which were unsuited for our climate. The salesmen SHOULD have been supplying our local nurseries (where I live) with Symphony instead of Geoff Hamilton, Radio Times instead of Mayor of Castorbridge, Mary Rose instead of Katherine Whateverhernameis, Dove and The Swan instead of A Shropshire Lad. I would think that sensitivity to American climate variations is PART OF YOUR JOB if you are working for an American distributor. So, I can't really blame DA for cancelling contracts of companies which have done a poor job of distribution.

I do fear that he may have to leave the stateside market altogether if his newest and best prove to be virused.

Thanks for the info. I love Austin roses and I do respect that Mr. Austin wish to protect his creations. However, I don't believe in destroying all the beautiful roses he has created all these years by limiting the supply. Whether he gets royalties or not his name will be forever enshrined along these roses as long as people continue to grow them.

I do love his roses but it is not much available in my area. I don't believe in ordering online as I like to see the product in person. It isn't in my interest to pay for expensive roses not including shipping cost. I think in the long run this will be a problem for the longevity of English roses. Up where I live, most people I know never heard of English roses.

In contrast, other roses are widely available eg. Kordes. I come across Kordes roses so easily and the newer varieties are available after a few years here. To be honest, my collection of Kordes roses continue to grow and new introductions are endless as opposed to only old austins.

My advice to Mr. Austin (senior and junior) is that generally speaking, most gardeners go to garden centres to get their plants. If they don't see your product they will never get the change to buy it. Yes, there are faithful followers but those numbers are smaller compared to the general public out there. In this fast paced world, visibility, availability and marketability will ensure your product longevity.

romogen, can I ask how long a patent lasts in the USA please ?

This is really bad news.

Carol

I'm confused.

My local nurseries still carry lots of Austin roses and can still order a few of those roses listed.

Is the issue that big box stores won't be able to carry these?

Or are older varieties being phased out?

The initial information when the thread was started (7 YEARS ago) was that Austin roses would only be available through the US Austin nursery. Their business model has been altered and they still license others to offer their new roses. They continue preventing anyone from offering their "obsolete" varieties if they wish to sell the new ones. Otherwise, anyone willing to purchase a license from them to sell their products can carry their new offerings, and, of course, those never patented or whose patents have expired, can be offered by anyone wishing to sell them providing they don't violate the trademarked names or attempt selling both new and
"obsolete" types. Hi David, US patents run for 21 years now and can be extended should the holder wish to pay for extended protection.

Thanks, that clears it up nicely.

Carol

You're welcome, Carol.

Thanks Kim.

ordphien: some of the roses in that list are still available to your local nursery because the growers still have them in stock. I assume we're talking about grafted plants. Once they sell out of what's left in their inventory, that's it, you can't order them for next year, because most wholesale growers don't want to loose their DA licenses by propagating his discontinued roses from that list.

The older varieties are being phased out because of greed. David Austin wants maximum royalties, having the older varieties around cannibalizes the sales of his newer introductions.

A few specialty rose nurseries are focusing on selling the off-patent Austins exclusively; however, there are quite a few of the older varieties completely missing from catalogs. For example, this year, I had a difficult time finding Chaucer, I can't find Happy Child or Troilus, and I've given up hope on ever locating Bibi Maizoon. I have cultivated each of them in the past and want them in my garden again, despite their perceived faults.

At the rate we keep on loosing rose nurseries, these hybrids will soon disappear from commerce. Case in point, I've been having a very tough time finding many of Ralph Moore's varieties after Sequoia closed -- such as 'Lady Moss'; and no, Burling Leong does not have all of them. The tight fisted folks at Texas A&M have Moore's collection, assuming the plants are still alive, but won't propagate them. In my opinion, that is the greatest loss to any hybridizer's legacy.

http://www.helpmefind.com/gardening/l.php?l=2.38237&tab=1

You're welcome. I no longer have Lady Moss, but believe I know to whom I gave it before moving. I'll have to check with her to make sure. I did collect and mail cuttings of Vineyard Song, Pink Powderpuff, Renny, Moore Bouquet, Fire'n Spice, Rainforest, Fresh Pink, Fakir's Delight, Sharon's Delight and 281-94-04 today for propagation. Keep your fingers crossed they make it.

Roseseek, I may be misreading this, but you have those with you and propagating?

Also, I never had an Austin, but this tactic is sheer idiocy. At this point I probably never will have the chance to get one. :(

No Joe, I don't have those with me. I collected them from a friend's garden while I was down south for the Great Rosarians of the World event at The Huntington last week. I'm not focusing on roses I don't want to breed with, but when I have access to things I know others want but can't get, I pass them on to friends who propagate and will make them available later on.

I cannot seem to find Happy Child anywhere.... does anyone know of any nursery that still carries it?

TennesseeNoisette - If you can grow roses on Fortuniana in your area, call K and M roses. He had Happy Child this Spring and probably still does. By the way, Happy Child does really great on Fortuniana. I had it on its own roots and there is no comparison. Much more growth and blooms on Fortuniana.

SueBelle

That's a nice list of cuttings Kim, my fingers are crossed. I've been wanting to breed with Fakir's Delight for many years now, but no luck waiting on RVR, Janet Inada isn't even sure if they still have a motherplant. Although, I don't know how it's even possible to kill that rose, it's such a monster!

Please keep me in mind if you source Lady Moss. Speaking of mosses, have you ever seen Skinner's Mossman anywhere? So far I've tracked down only two of Moore's Persians, Peach & Sunset, the rest are M.I.A. The Shadow Dancer seedling looks like it has potential for some interesting crosses....

I was lucky enough to get "Pure Bea" from Jeri last month. Now let's see if my Suncrest clone will cross pollinate. I regret loosing my UCB clone many years ago, it was a darker flower color than Suncrest's.

I don't think it is enethical for Mr. Austin to want more royalties. After all he has a business to run and years spend to discover new varieties. All of these things cost money. I have a problem with supply availability however. I live around Toronto which is a big city. However I never see any new Austin's available. If they phased out the few old ones then we would never grow them up here. i am not surprised at all that no one I ever talk to has ever heard of these roses. It says a lot.

Whatever propagates will be listed here. That's why they were collected; to get them spread around better so IF there is ever another "Renaissance", they are more likely to be found again. The UC Big Pink Minutifolia is also likely to become more widely available. I received one earlier this year and it is finally throwing more basal growth, which often leads to the arching growth that tip roots. And, I met a young gentleman at GROTW who is a new addition to the Horticulture Staff at Berkeley Botanical. We discussed many things, this Minutifolia in particular and his statement was, "We need to propagate this!". I wholeheartedly agree! I'm glad you got Pure Bea. I thought someone might be interested, which is why I offered it to Jeri. I hope the one I gave her flourishes in her garden! You can obtain all of the botanical information about it, including who discovered and then distributed it on its HMF page. Thanks to Tessie, we both have it!

Jjpeace: that is your opinion, but it would be a sad day indeed if the only roses available to the rest of North America are determined by what is popular in Toronto!

Kim: There will be demand for these obscure varieties again, everything is cyclical. The key is to have them propagated, distributed, and safely tucked away in many gardens instead of letting them disappear forever during the dark ages -- just like the ancient libraries of Alexandria or Timbuktu.

A long time ago I was assistant to the curator at UC Berkeley Botanical Garden while doing my undergrad. The person in charge of the California section was kind enough to give me a rooted sucker of minutifolia because I was doing a research project. Afterwards, I kept the plant alive for ten years in a #1 pot in San Francisco, but lost it during an extended trip because my plant sitter didn't water it. Minutifolia was dormant at the time. I'm glad it's being more widely distributed, because through the years, the friends of the garden that run the plant sales rarely propagated it.

I have plenty of experience keeping this ENDANGERED species alive, it prefers dappled shade in hot situations and produces bigger leaves & flowers with regular water. If the placement is correct, the plant explodes with growth. The growing media in the pot is fast draining, but it has no qualms sending roots through the holes into clay soil. Except for water, I basically just ignore it, no pruning, fertilizer, or spray. I'm glad you generously donated Pure Bea to the heritage group, I will treasure it. I had already contacted Tessie last year about PB. I asked her about hips but she didn't get any viable seedlings....

My 10+ year old Suncrest on its fourth flush this season:

Oooh!!! That's beautiful, Romogen!!! So sweet looking!! Gorgeous!!

Carol

@ Romogen. I don't mean to be rude, but I never said that the rest of north america should be "dictated" by Toronto's taste in roses. I know I am from Canada but english is still english. Please read other people opinion more carefully before you insult them.

Jjpeace: my reading comprehension skills are perfectly fine, thank you very much. Perhaps it would behoove you to choose your wording in a manner less befitting a bull in a china shop.

That is fine with me. I am not going to belittle myself and fellow posters by making this forum toxic. You think what you like. Both of our posts are there for anyone to read. I don't like being accused of things that I never said! That is the point I am trying to make.

Two American specialty rose nurseries, Long Ago Roses and Roses Unlimited, have a nice selection of both off patent and recently introduced DA roses. Am I to understand that both these nurseries will have to no longer offer the to be discontinued roses? I think that inventory represents a lot of work and care and attention on the part of both Pat and Linda.

As long as nothing has changed with the Austin Nursery business model, and they don't wish to purchase a license to sell the latest offerings, nothing will change. As long as they aren't offering patented varieties without licensing agreements or selling the trademarked varieties under the trademarked names without a licensing agreement, or trying to sell the latest with a licensing agreement which prohibits them from selling them, nothing will change. They would then be free to sell whichever ones are not patented and the patented ones they have purchased the legal rights to sell.

http://www.inta.org/TrademarkBasics/FactSheets/Pages/LossofTrademarkRightsFactSheet.aspx
As I understand it, they can't maintain a trademark for the purpose of keeping stuff off the market.

I'm sure they don't maintain the trademarks to prevent the roses from being sold, but to make sure they collect every possible dollar of royalties. The trademarks won't prevent the roses from being sold, just from being identified by their trademarked names unless they're paid for their uses.