Actually, the Greenpeace scheme is far more damaging than a simple "stall"; it has damaged world trade and also could potentially devastate the environment.
There is actually a similar problem right here in the US, that the government is noticing. That is, "non-profit" organizations endorse commercial products or enterprises, and then those organizations donate back to the organizations. This is clearly a form of a payoff. I'll try to find the story on this in the news, it was recent.
Similarly, Greenpeace is setting up business cartels to pull business away from the US and US trade channels, and replacing them with "friends" in South America and the EU. These same parties then donate to Greenpeace, or provide political support, which is basically a laundered payoff.
The other problem (besides ethics) in this case is that by doing this they are drumming up farm business in environmentally sensitive areas, such as the cerrado and rainforest. Once these areas are gone, the damage is permanent. And of course, if they won't plant the more environmentally beneficial gene crops in South America, the damage to the environment is compounded.
(You said)
This is the same kind of campaign run against Qualcomm by competitors trying to stall the company. |
