Spathoglottis 'Mello Yellow'

[Ray]

A very complex terrestrial hybrid - not registered; this is one of those "Plant Patent Applied For" cultivars intended for mass marketing, but I couldn't resist them. I have lots of seedlings available - cheap.

Lousy image from the grower

[RosieC]

Looks really pretty, I can see why you couldn't resist.

[CA2FLxplant]

And where can I get one?? Love that color!!

[Vanda lover]

It's beautiful! I love spath. They bloom for such a long time but I had to give up on mine. No matter what I did, scale and mealy were drawn like magnets to them.

[MRay]

Many years are spent in the breeding, selection, and development of production protocols. Plants are selected for very specific growth characteristics that the seedlings may or may not possess. To have variable seedlings in the horticultural world that are called 'Mello Yellow' could damage the reputation of the young variety that is thought to be clonally propagated.

---------- Post added at 12:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:33 PM ----------

Truly a beautiful plant. A very clear one can be seen by visiting Oglesby's web site.

[reliablefool]

I'm pretty sure he bought them from the propagator to resell...why else would the Oglesby sell them in 98 plug trays? Unless of course you are Oglesby and you're saying you didn't do this. *shrug* I guess I just give people the benefit of the doubt. Heh.

[MRay]

Resale of purchased protected items is not prohibited by law. Only the clonal propagation is prohibited under U.S. patent law. The question then becomes what to call them so that they are very distinguishable from clonally propagated material.

[Ordphien]

I think he bought the seedlings.
I can't really see him messing around with the law like that.

[AnonYMouse]

MRay, get to the point, please.

Are you stating that Ray acquired the seedling from an entity other than Oglesby? Do you represent Oglesby or some regulatory agency?

[WhiteRabbit]

Originally Posted by MRay

Resale of purchased protected items is not prohibited by law. What is prohibited is the propagation thereof. Distributing "seedlings" from a protected variety is still a prohibited form of propagation without the owner's consent.

Oglesby website http://www.oglesbytc.com/company/ States they are a supplier of young plants for COMMERCIAL GROWERS ... Seedlings are young plants; Ray is a commercial grower ...
If not for resale, what could possibly be the point?
Or are you of the belief that Ray propagated these seedlings? If so, why do you assume that? It seems the logical assumption would be that the seedlings were purchased from the owner with both parties aware of the intent of resale.

*eta*
Ok, maybe it's the term 'seedling' that's caused this fuss ...? All young orchids (a ways off from being bloom size) may be called 'seedling' regardless of method of propagation - it's used to refer to size and how far off from bloom size they are - not referring to having been grown from seed. Small mericloned plants may be called 'seedlings'.