Are you referring to the ingredients, or the expression of how to use those ingredients to make the recipe?

"Copyright law specifies that "substantial literary expression in the form of an explanation or directions," such as a cookbook, can be copyrighted but that a mere list of ingredients cannot receive that protection."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/03/AR2006010300316.html

If your original expression of a recipe has been copied to a substantial degree, without attribution, you could have copyright infringement.

Intellectual property is intellectual property, be it on paper or on the internet.

Was you blog labeled as copyrighted? (not that is HAS to be to be considered proprietary)

This article explains a lot, and sadly it happen a lot: Theft of a Food Blog

Photos are copyrighted, but basically ingredients and instructions on how to use the ingredients are not. There are steps to copyright register every recipe with the government, but that can be costly and time consuming for a hobby blogger.

Basically:

“Recipes also can’t be copyrighted,” says Bauer. Headnotes and instructions can be as those are unique texts. Collections of recipes can also be copyrighted. Lists of ingredients, however, cannot. So legally stealing a recipe only requires a few tweaks to the text for the theft to become a unique product in the eyes of copyright law.

“In the end, it all comes down to who has deeper pockets. Most bloggers can’t afford to hire a lawyer to sue or even to pay copyright fees, so they just have to deal with it the best they can and on their own,” says Bauer.

It just disappoints me that a highly esteemed company like Ball would copy recipes without giving credit. I would have been thrilled if they contacted me first and asked for permission.

Photos might be copyrighted, but I thought that if you post pictures here and on other websites, you give permission for others to use?

Sushi, yes photos are definitely copyrighted automatically, as they are "original and creative" expressions of work. Here is an article that explains it:

The Definitive Guide to Copyright and Recipes

I've had publishers contact me to use my photos before. Others cannot use them without your permission.

I had a food blog and had photos lifted ;-( You have to watermark them to avoid.

Whether or not recipe infringement is actionable is tough to say, probably hard to prove, and definitely expensive.

Mimi, yep! Looks like I should invest and pay to have my recipes copyrighted in the future if I don't want this to happen again. I have quite a few original recipes that I've been working on the past year that I was going to post, but not now. :-(

The sad thing is, I'm not even sure this would do anything, as all a person has to do is change one ingredient or technique and it's a brand new recipe - even if the end result is essentially the same.

I think we have to realize that there are memes that we also incorporate to establish our spin on recipes that can be traced to time immemorial. We usually stand on the shoulders of others (well, avant garde creations such as molecular gastronomy aside).

Copyrighting your blog and its contents is very easy. Add watermarks to your photos and you've done all you can.

If you plan on publishing a book, or something else monetary, don't put your recipes on the internet. It's just a foregone conclusion that they will get copied.

Plus, unless you're some powerhouse like Martha Stewart, what are you going to do anyway?

I hope you don't let this deter your creative outlet, as most blogs are!

A few decades ago there was a highly successful cookbook made by some local ladies called Muffin Mania.

I've seen a blog by a local woman who had people raving about "her" banana muffin recipe. Lo and behold it was identical to the Muffin Mania recipe that was popular in the 80's. It clearly states on the cookbook not to publish, copy or release them, etc.

I wrote to the blogger stating that she took their recipe and is touting it as her own.

Even Food Network stars do it. I visit Food Network on Face Book a lot. One of the worst is The Pioneer Woman. Food Network says, try out Ree Drummond's "whatever," and many irritated responses say, "My mom made that in the 60's! It's not Ree's!!

Is Annie's salsa in the book?

Cindy, I looked for it, but it isn't there. I've noticed that if an online recipe was inspired by another famous recipe or previously published recipe, they didn't use it. It seems the recipe researchers made sure to scout out lesser known resources.

Does anyone remember Linda Lou and Katie from the forums? Some of their stuff is in there too, but then again, I don't know the original source of those recipes.

If you Google "Annie's Salsa" hundreds of hits come up, so I bet they didn't want to mess with that. :- )

Houzz copyright info.

http://www.houzz.com/copyrightTrademarkPolicy

gardengrlz

Mimi, yep! Looks like I should invest and pay to have my recipes copyrighted in the future if I don't want this to happen again.

*****

Just to be clear, you copyright your blog and its contents, which includes recipes, photos, text, artwork, etc.

I'm not a lawyer but have dealt with copyright issues before. Even if a recipe is 100% original from foodstuffs that have never before been combined, you can't copyright or trademark ingredients. You can copyright the words you use to talk about those ingredients. But if I make your pie and write about how I made it, in my own words, it isn't a violation of your copyright, because it's only the words you wrote that have a copyright, not what it is you were making.

You cannot patent common things, either, so even if you made tofu and truffle balls, boiled in yak's milk, fried in bison fat, scrambled with a penguin egg and topped with harisa and saffron, something I seriously doubt has been conceived before, you cannot patent it since it's just a combination of known foodstuffs, cooked in an ordinary (if disgusting) manner. You could possibly patent a transformative factory process, but I think, really, it's only the machine that can be patented, not the process. But again, I'm not a lawyer, so might not have that quite right. "State of the art" doesn't really mean the newest, most innovative thing--it's patent office speak for a known thing out in the world, that therefore cannot be patented because it's neither new nor innovative.

Don't fool yourself with watermarks and/or copyright notices in the metadata of your photos. They're like an alarm on your car--someone who wants it isn't deterred. They might might it a less tempting target for casual theft, like the North American woman in Kitchens who found a picture she'd taken of her dog published as a greeting card in Scotland, but using 12 year old software and no toolkits, I can remove both in about half an hour. Someone with the right programs can do it in a minute or less. I'm not saying I do it--just that I know how. So do your grandchildren.

You absolutely can patent a process, and we have done it at JRS - the process we use to produce an ombré finish on wood furniture. It takes a lot of documentation, but it can be done and is a lot more complicated than getting a design patent. As I said before, a patent is very different from a copyright. Patents expire after 14 years, but some can be renewed for another 14 years, and then they go into public domain. Copyrights last a lifetime, but Mickey Mouse (Disney) has extended its copyright every time it is about to expire, through paid acts of congress.

I remember LindaLou and Katie still posts here. When I dabbled in canning years ago I made Katie's peach salsa. Is that in there? I think she won an award for it.

Yes, Cindy. Ball took that recipe and titled it "Fiery Peach Salsa". They tweaked it a little, but it is essentially the same recipe.

For example, instead of Katie's regular white vinegar, they subbed apple cider vinegar. Instead of Katie's 4 jalapenos, they subbed with 2 jalapenos and 1 habanero. Instead of Katie's 2 tablespoons of honey, they added sugar. They did remove the seasonings though, except salt.

Also, Linda Lou's "Apple Pie Jam" is in there except they subbed Linda's brown sugar for regular sugar.

So, this is a pattern with Ball. Interesting.

You're right, Lars. I was referring to a cooking process. I doubt there's a sufficiently innovative food preparation process that would be patentable, but, as I said, it's possible that some kind of fancy factory thing might potentially be, though more likely the machine it's done on, rather than the process itself. Like, you can design a better temperature regulator or water circulator, but people have been cooking in pouches in water since the beginning of time.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it true that with your ombre finish patent, the patent only covers the way it's done, rather than the end look? That if someone figures out an entirely different process to get to the same appearance, it wouldn't be a violation?

Yes, the patent only covers the way we achieve the look - not the final appearance, and so if someone figures out an entirely different process, it would not be a violation.

I understand that this post is about copyrights and who owns what --- but here is another thought about food -- There are just so many ways you can combine ingredients; there are just so many measurements of those ingredients you can put together. What my grandmother made into doughnuts from scratch beginning in the 1880's may be pretty much exactly what is and has been published in a hundred thousand cookbooks, blogs, forums, and church cookbooks as an "original" recipe. In today's food world there is little left that hasn't already been made by somebody else somewhere here and in every other country. Flour/meal, sugar, fat, protein/dairy, salt all end up as some kind of doughnut.

Exactly, Nancy! That's why you can't copyright a list of ingredients.

Thanks for the clarification, Lars.

My thoughts have always been that, with the ingredients/ processes that are available to me, there is nothing 'original' that I can do with them...it's all been done before by someone somewhere sometime. All I can do is expand my experience and 'discover' stuff that is new to me.

I personally do not follow the idea that everything has already been done before and that there is nothing new under the sun. That was proclaimed in the 19th century, and it was suggested that the patent office close down around 1900 because everything that could be invented and already been invented. I admit that it is more difficult with food and recipes, but still not impossible.

In the 1950s on the Burns & Allen Show, their neighbor came up with a new idea; Frozen Yogurt, and it was considered a huge joke, and everyone laughed at it. However, that just shows that at that time, it was a novel idea. Some people are inventors/innovators, most people are not. People today have access to a much wider variety of ingredients than previously, and this helps make innovation possible. A friend of mine recently invented a bacon/jalapeño ice cream that sounds odd but actually tasted good.

Yes, but I had bacon/jalapeño ice cream a dozen years ago. Your neighbor's is probably better, but the idea isn't new.

Similarly, frozen yoghurt as a dessert concept might have been joke worthy 60 years ago, but frozen liquid dairy products had been very popular for a couple hundred years before that, and subbing in yoghurt for cream is not innovative enough to be really different. Yoghurt eating peoples in places with hard freezes had probably been doing it for centuries without it blossoming on the American consciousness. It was the invention of a commercially stable delivery system that made frozen yoghurt a thing. The dry mix and machine may have been innovative. The idea of making a frozen sweet yoghurt dessert was not. Even tofu and truffle balls, boiled in yak's milk, fried in bison fat,
scrambled with a penguin egg and topped with harisa and saffron, with ingredients from all over the world in a ridiculous combination isn't innovative. The molecular foams and dusts are novel as something to actually eat, but aerating with an ISI bottle or freezing with liquid nitrogen is not. And while those tools are cool, aerating is nothing new or modern, nor is freezing.

There's a big difference between the kind of "invention" that starts a fad, and something that is truly innovative rather than just a rearrangement of old ideas that turns out good.

ci_lantro may be referring to personal experience and 'inventing' by discovery on ones own...google bacon/jalapeno i.e. cream and probably over a hundred hits going back a half dozen years.

Once we get ourselves out from the constraints of recipes and look into our fridges like a 'chopped' basket, we are discovering and inventing recipes constantly. Tweaking and substituting to suit our tastes.

I could probably write a rhubarb recipe book, : ) and betcha someone might come along and say this and that is just like mine, though i doubt it. Rhubarb means pie to most.

Marcella is a good example of recipe writing that needs the lively text as a key 'ingredient' to the over-all recipe experience. Very personal and difficult to copy without giving credit.

To our op. It all depends on what your long term plans are. If a business plan is in the works or even desired. It can be a frustrating and endless battle not worth it.

I do hold great respect for a company that gives credit to original recipes like Bob'sRedMill. I use a favorite recipe on the corn flour package for a waffle that uses yogurt. Nice to know the guys name! and often refer to the recipe by his name.

Sleevendog brings up a good point, among many. It's just wrong for Ball to lift recipes from Gardengrlz whether there is any copyright protection or not, and it's even worse to do so without giving credit. I wonder if this was done as an act of plagiarism by an individual working there, rather than an assignment to bring back recipes from the web. Perhaps a complaint letter to Ball might have some impact?

I have recipes I've developed where I started with something on the 'net, but ended up with something different enough to claim as my own. I still credit the original, as well as those the original credited, even when it's just for my personal files.

The friend I am talking about made the bacon/jalapeño ice cream about 14 years ago (recent by my standards), but she may have gotten it from someone else.

In my opinion, if someone creates something without being aware of it having being done before, they are still being inventive.

LED light bulbs were a new invention, even though light bulbs existed before. Pretty much all inventions have precedents - otherwise they would not be useful in society, as they must be able to be integrated into daily life.

Oh! Well, then she might have been the first! I didn't mean that she didn't creat her recipe and "invent" it herself. I wouldn't be surprised if she did, even if it were yesterday. Just that combining a few well known ingredients in a different way isn't enough to be innovative on the level where one could claim rights to it. I agree that they're still being inventive--just not innovative across society.

There's a difference with technology. That's where state of the art comes in. It was a big struggle to invent LED lightbulbs. Given the existence of LEDs and the existence of lightbulbs, it seemed like an obvious next step, but it did take a leap to make it work. If someone had just taken some common LEDs and put them in a flashlight housing with some wires, and it had worked, I don't think it would have been innovative. Getting the right color LEDs to produce the right kind of light required innovation. Putting some sweetened yoghurt on ice or adding burger toppings to ice cream is creative and interesting but not really "new".

Ingredients in recipes for canning are (for health safety reasons) not going to vary a whole lot. How one expresses the procedure should not be done word for word, but the actual process isn't going to vary a whole lot.

As someone with a food blog, I sometimes make recipes others have made.

I may use the same ingredient list, or I may modify depending on the ingredients, availability and whim.

I always reword the process, and put in my own experiences along the way.

No matter how stunning someone else's photo is, I always use my own camera and plating.

I always refer back to the source recipe - depending on the way the original recipe was presented, if online, they will get a pingback and know that I've linked to them. (They usually drop by and are happy I liked what they made enough that I tried it out myself.)

As for people nipping my photos -- personally at this point I don't really care. I'd appreciate acknowledgement, but at this point I'm not in the business to profit. If that changes, my attitudes and decisions at that point will change, too.

I don't know, Pillog, those yak milk boiled balls with penguin eggs, etc., sounds pretty new to me. I think that bison fat is going to be problematic to source....then again...

https://www.northstarbison.com/shop/bison-fat?nocache

LOL! I actually think the penguin egg would be hardest to source. They used to sell penguin eggs for eating, but I just did a search and it seems they're protected species now. Substituting a common ostrich egg, which are farmed and quite available, I stick to my story. The hump of bison is mostly fat, I believe, but even though bison is lean, there's enough fat on the ribs we barbecue to fry up some tofu-truffle balls if one doesn't have access to the suet packs. :) There's nothing new about any of the ingredients or methods in tofu and truffle balls, boiled in yak's milk, fried in bison fat,
scrambled with a penguin (ostrich) egg and topped with harisa and saffron. That was my point. It's easy to conceive precisely because it isn't new.

Yes, I was just being flip. I thought the penguin egg would be hardest too. When I looked them up I found a bunch of penguin egg toys.

I did laugh! It was funny. So was the bison suet pack! But you made me think about the actual availability of penguin eggs since the crazy people on TV don't use them. :)