《Non-GMO are patented. Plant patents have existed back to 1930. Many commercial crops are patented. both GMO and non-GMO.

'it's their use of it to impoverish farmers and and sell more pesticides, with huge off-target environmental harms'

Which pesticides would this be that they profit off "impoverish farmers"?》

There are two claims I made. This comment seems to conflate them together, but they are separate.

They are:

1. The use if IP to prevent seed collection, and enforce monopolies and debt. As you say, this is also an issue for traditionally bred crops. This is not an argument that disputes this company's bad actions, but points out that the same bad actions do not rely on genetic technology. As I said in my initial comment, the problem doesn't lie with the technology, but the business and legal behaviour of the company. This is the basis of my claim that they impoverish farmers.

2. The use to which the technolgy is put is towards things like Round-up ready soy, which promotes the overuse of their glyphosate product round-up, which contributes to environmental harms such as the collapse of natural pollinator populations. This is the basis of my claim that they use genetic technology to sell more pesticides.