(The amendment language was sent to the state before it legalized hemp cultivation and processing and the USDA approved a state industrial hemp plan, though Harris Sliwoski’s Griffen Thorne has noted that aside from a smokable hemp ban, South Dakota hasn’t established clear regulations addressing the sale of hemp.)

“If you create something like Charlotte’s Web or some strain that is in extraordinarily high demand, and people want it everywhere and view you as having it locked down, then the IP could definitely be a revenue source,” says Vince Sliwoski, an intellectual property lawyer who manages Harris Sliwoski’s Portland office and teaches Cannabis Law and Policy at Lewis & Clark Law School. “Otherwise, licensees may be reluctant.”

Aaron Pelley, owner of the Seattle-based cannabis litigation team Pelley Law, warns that investigators are not always your friends. Neither are they always your enemies, of course, but you need to be wary.

“No one’s business plan is to sink $800,000 or so into their growing business, operate for six months, make a few mistakes and lose it all,” Pelley says. “That’s not a business plan, but that can easily happen.”

Many conscientious Liquor Control Board (LCB) investigators (or those from the marijuana governing body in your state) are true advocates, and take the education part of their job seriously and want to see well-run businesses succeed. The problem, Pelley says, is that many prefer to focus on enforcement over education and even are encouraged to find ways to write up multiple violations for the same activity.

“Then you have growers who are doing everything they can to get it right, who go from operating with a desire for compliance to operating in absolute terror and fear of getting one more violation and losing their license,” Pelley says. “I’ve never met anyone who can function well in a company where they are operating from a place of fear.”