Questions 下列各 are based on the following passage. Vernon Bowman, a 75-year-old farmer from rural Indiana, did something that got him sued. Heplanted soybeans (大豆) sold as cattle feed. But Monsanto, the agricultural giant, insists it has a patenton the kind of genetically modified seeds Bowman used and that the patent continues to all of theprogeny (后代) of those seeds. Have we really gotten to the point that planting a seed can lead to a high-stakes Supreme Court patentlawsuit? We have, and that case is Bowman vs. Monsanto, which is being argued on Tuesday.Monsantos critics have attacked the company for its 'merciless legal battles against small farmers,' andthey are hoping this will be the case that puts it in its place. They are also hoping the courts ruling willrein in patent law, which is increasingly being used to claim new life forms as private property. Monsanto and its supporters, not surprisingly, see the case very differently. They argue that when acompany like Monsanto goes to great expense to create a valuable new genetically modified seed, it mustbe able to protect its property interests. If farmers like Bowman are able to use these seeds without payingthe designated fee, it will remove the incentives for companies like Monsanto to innovate. Monsanto accused Bowman of patent infringement and won an $ 84,456 damage award. Rather thanpay up or work out a settlement, Bowman decided to appeal--all the way to the Supreme Court. He said'Monsanto should not be able, just because theyve got billions of dollars to spend on legal fees, to try to terrify farmers into obeying their agreements by massive force and threats. ' The central issue in the case is whether patent rights to living things extend to the progeny of thosethings. Monsanto argues that its patents extend to later generations. But Bowmans supporters argue thatMonsanto is trying to expand the scope of patents in ways that would enrich big corporations and hurtsmall farmers. They say that ff Monsanto wins, the impact will extend far beyond agriculture--locking upproperty rights in an array of important areas. Knowledge Ecology International contends that the SupremeCourts ruling could have 'profound effects' on other biotech industries. If this were a Hollywood movie, the courageous old Indiana farmer would beat the profit-mindedcorporation before the credits rolled. But this is a real-life argument before a Supreme Court that has awell-earned reputation for looking out for the interests of large corporations. This case gives the court anopportunity to rein in the growing use of patents to protect genetically engineered crops and other lifeforms--but the court may well use it to give this trend a powerful new endorsement. Why did Vernon Bowman get sued?