Nestlé Purina needs slapping down!

I'm outraged to learn of the bullying behavior of Nestlé Purina pet foods. I've gone into the story in some depth, and all the sources I've been able to locate seem to confirm the account of the 'victim' in this story: so I'll let them tell it, as found on their Web site.

Nestec S.A. (better known as Nestle), parent company of Purina, a pet food manufacturer based in St. Louis, Missouri, and Wysong Corporation, a health education and nutritional development company in Midland, Michigan, have filed suits against one another in the Eastern District Federal Court in Missouri.

The suits are related to a technology invented by Dr. Wysong in the early 1980’s to enrobe pet and human foods with probiotics. These are health giving organisms, such as found in yogurt, that can boost the immune system, fight pathogens, produce nutrients and growth factors, and help digestion.

Although Wysong did not seek a patent, it has used the technology in both animal and human foods since the early 1980s. Due in large part to Wysong’s educational efforts and product development, probiotics have become a part of the collective health consciousness of the public and food industry. Of late, many natural pet food companies have begun using Dr. Wysong’s technology as well.

Nestle/Purina obtained a patent granted in 1999 for the same technology. To this date, however, Purina has not incorporated probiotics in its own products — although its patent describes in detail the many health benefits of probiotics. Instead, it is attempting to prevent Wysong and other companies from using probiotics unless a licensing fee (tax) is paid to Purina.

A patent is not valid if the invention (prior art) exists in the public domain prior to the patent. The evidence of Wysong’s prior art for over fifteen years before the 1999 Nestle patent was granted is, according to Wysong, incontrovertible and ample. In fact, in 2004 just a portion of Wysong’s prior art evidence swayed a European patent review board to deny Nestle/Purina a like European patent. The decision was upheld on Appeal.

These facts have been repeatedly made known to, but ignored by Nestle/Purina. Purina’s ultimatum is that Wysong either pay sales-based licensing fees (essentially, a tax) going back six years and forward into the future, or pay for expensive patent litigation that can run into the millions.

Wysong, a small family owned company, is unwilling to pay licensing fees to the multibillion dollar Nestle/Purina for what amounts to Wysong’s own invention, and consequently now finds itself being sued by a company literally hundreds of times its size. Purina takes the position that since they were granted a patent they intend to enforce it and extract commissions from all natural pet food companies using probiotics.

There's more at Wysong's Web site.

As I said, I researched this, being unwilling to take one side's arguments at face value. Sure enough, Wysong's claims about the European patent that was denied to Nestlé Purina appear to be completely accurate. Wysong was, indeed, able to prove that it had developed Purina's 'invention' years before that company filed for a patent, and the latter's application for a European patent was, indeed, denied on those grounds. Interested readers can do their own Internet searches for source material.

It seems to me that Nestlé Purina is trying to use its enormous economic muscle to claim as its own an invention that it never developed, and force everyone else to pay it money for the privilege of using a technique that its true inventors made available to all, free of charge.

Quite frankly, this stinks.

I urge all my readers to pass on news of this matter to any and all animal-lovers you may know. I further urge you to boycott Nestlé Purina pet products, and to ask your friends to do the same - and to contact Nestle Purina to let them know that you're doing so, and why. Their online contact form may be found here. Their Web site is here.

Peter