Murder doesn't commit itself, copyright violation doesn't commit itself. Plants to seed and grow by themselves, without any outside help.
Whether or not a farmer encourages a particular seed to grow, the seeds would have sprouted and grown of their own accord. That is the fundamental difference between copyright violation and gene patent violation.
If a farmer doesn't knowingly violate, he will not be prosecuted. Having read a large number of court summaries from Monsanto cases, I haven't yet found one where they brought a case against someone who was simply dealing with accidental contamination.
If copyright infringing files were to end up on my computer by genuine accident, I would not be prosecuted for copyright infringement. For example, if I downloaded a zip file that was supposed to contain an album that I had paid for, but also accidentally contained an extra mp3 of a file I hadn't paid for, no court would find me in violation of copyright law.
There has to be intent, which nullifies the argument that it matters that seed self-replicates.
Whether or not a farmer encourages a particular seed to grow, the seeds would have sprouted and grown of their own accord. That is the fundamental difference between copyright violation and gene patent violation.