Malaysia Seeking to Copyright Food?

Techdirt is reporting that Malaysia seems to be jumping on the copyright/trademark bandwagon and attempting to protect the "ownership" of certain ethnic foods. Of course, this may just be a massive PR push in an attempt to grab some eyeballs. "Last year, around this time, we noted that the country of Lebanon was trying to claim that it owns hummus and other middle eastern foods, such as falafel, tabouleh and baba gannouj, and that no other country could produce them. It seems that other parts of the world are seeing the same sort of thing, as Malaysia is trying to declare that it owns popular Malaysian dishes, like nasi lemak."

Comments

no worries

[bugi]

Worry not, there will be cheap knockoffs coming out of China soon enough.

Re:no worries

[Tuidjy]

In the same way that Bulgaria, Serbia, and Belgium produce 'cheap knockoffs' of Feta cheese, but have to call it something else, because Greece has been awarded the 'copyright' by the EU?

"Appellation d'origine contrôlée" has existed for centuries, and there are plenty of sensible arguments for and against it. I would not mind seeing where Slashdot stands on that issue, but presenting what Malaysia is doing as a brand new concept is ridiculous.

Re:no worries

[Anonymous Coward]

But they will be made from lead and melamine.

Re:no worries

[jayme0227]

Actually, I'd guess Malaysia would produce their own cheap knockoffs.

Re:no worries

[Anonymous Coward]

So, would genetically re-engineering of food stuffs fall under reverse engineering laws?

Oh noes.

Re:no worries

[Anonymous Coward]

...but presenting what Malaysia is doing as a brand new concept is ridiculous.

It says in the summary that what Malaysia is doing isn't a new concept:

"Last year, around this time, we noted that the country of Lebanon was trying to claim that it owns hummus and other middle eastern foods..."

Re:no worries

[GoCal92]

Actually, this is different. In the EU and US, names of food is controlled as trademarks. You can still produce sparking wine in the Napa Valley, but you can't claim it came from the Champagne region. What Malaysia is claiming is that they own the "copyright" to these food and that no one else is allowed to even produce it elsewhere. Of course, the US and EU fight over their trademarks - the US considers "champagne" (little "c") to be a semi-generic term, thus "California champagne" is o.k. Same with terms like Cheddar. And, the EU failed to recognize US designations, such as Idaho potatoes or Vidalia onions until they lost a WTO case in 2004.

Re:no worries

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

"Appellation d'origine contrôlée" has existed for centuries, and there are plenty of sensible arguments for and against it. I would not mind seeing where Slashdot stands on that issue, but presenting what Malaysia is doing as a brand new concept is ridiculous.

The problem here is that what Malaysia is doing, as described by the article linked from the article linked from the posting (grrrr), isn't in fact a form of AOC. AOC has never been applied to recipes; it has only been applied to ingredients and processed agricultural products.

In the case of an AOC, the intent is clear: if the region of Sancerre makes a remarkable wine and people seek it out as being special, it would be good to prevent winemakers not from Sancerre from labeling ultra-cheap wines as "Sancerre" and selling it for inflated prices. In the case of Malaysian recipes, on the other hand, it's not at all clear what the intent is, since it just cannot be analogous. Recipes are things that people prepare when they want to eat them, not a finished foodstuff that they buy. The closest I can stretch this analogy would be some sort of ban on preventing non-Malaysian companies from labeling frozen or instant packaged meals with the names of the Malaysian dishes, but even that just degenerates into absurdity when you try to apply it to restaurants who cook their own nasi lemak on a per-order basis.

Re:no worries

[McFortner]

They can copyright all they want. I'll just eat open source food like Tex-Mex.... Michael

Re:no worries

[tikram]

As a Serbian I can assure you there are lots of Feta products that are really declared as Feta.

For example: http://www.mlekara.co.rs/downloads/grekos-oglas%20mama.jpg

Re:no worries

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

As a Serbian I can assure you there are lots of Feta products that are really declared as Feta.

Serbia is not part of the EU. So yeah, you can sell Serbian-made cheese in Serbia and call it "feta," but any cheese you export to the EU may not be labeled so. And if you joined the EU, unless you got a special concession about this, those cheeses you mention would have to change their labeling.

Re:no worries

[vux984]

Actually, this is different. In the EU and US, names of food is controlled as trademarks. You can still produce sparking wine in the Napa Valley, but you can't claim it came from the Champagne region.

Of course not, because that would be an outright lie. It was produced in Napa Valley, USA not the Champagne, France, so of course you can't claim it came from Champagne, France.

I think you meant that you can't call California sparkling wine "Champagne", which is true for the reason you outlined.

That said, things are getting pretty dodgy with Wine.

A current problem in BC for example is that less reputable companies are taking grapes grown in wineries in Croatia and elsewhere in Eastern Europe, and are shipping them to be bottled in British Columbia, Canada and are thus legally and accurately bearing labels claiming 'bottled in the Oakanagan, British Columbia'.

Of course, since the grapes aren't actually grown in the oakanagan, the whole thing is a complete farce. But these wines are ending up on "BC wine lists", and being sold out liquor stores as "BC Wines" I don't know offhand but I wouldn't be surprised if California's good name is being similarly tainted by this practice.

Re:no worries

[Tuidjy]

It was no accident that I gave Feta cheese as an example. Feta is not a region in Greece. It is accepted that Feta derives from an Italian word meaning slice. I also think that it is quite a stretch to claim that cheeses are 'just' processed milk. After all, the EU forbid members to produce 'Feta' cheese because their recipes sometimes used other than goat milk. And yes, 'Feta cheese' is definitely an AOC in Europe.

In English, as far as I know, 'Feta cheese' is used to describe all kinds of 'Greek-style', 'Brine', or 'White cheese'. So yes, it would be illegal in Europe, for someone to make his own white cheese, even if he is using goat milk (i.e. the proper procedure), and call it Feta. And if you happen to only speak English, you have to think up another name.

So please, before you 'grrrr' at me, check your facts.

Re:no worries

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem isn't with recognizing some geographic source names- the problem is turning those names into enforceable local monopolies when they don't represent anything to the consumer. Here, "Washington apples" or "Idaho potatos" or "California raisins" all provide us with origin information without overstepping into limiting how other producers can market apples, potatos, or raisins. I pray that "Feta" really means a small Greek island to Europeans, because here, it means the cheese. Nobody is going to reach for "crumbly sheep and goat milk cheese aged in brine" rather than "feta cheese". What's worse is the geographic origin turns this understanding on its head: make another style of cheese in Feta (say "Cheddar") and suddenly it too is Feta cheese. Flip to the people in England making sheep cheese and calling it Cheddar and you have these perfectly useful generic terms now incapable of promoting your own products or anyone else's.

Consumer understanding should dominate these findings. If people think swiss cheese means dry cheese with holes in it, great, let anyone use it. If people think that means cheese made in Switzerland, sure, take that term away from everyone else. The reality, I believe, is that mostly consumers use these words (and assume producer's uses of these words) reflect style of product rather than geographic origin.

Re:no worries

[CastrTroy]

Not sure about EU or US, but in Canada, the rules for cheese are as follows. You can have many different kinds of Feta including Greek Feta, Bulgarian Feta, French Feta, Canadian Feta. Now you can't call something Greek Feta unless it actually comes from Greece. The only confusing part is that you can call your product Greek Style Feta, which usually mean's it's made from sheep milk, but doesn't mean it actually comes from any specific country (granted, the country of origin has to be printed elsewhere on the label anyway, as with all food products).

Re:no worries

[Hatta]

Helen: Hmm, Pita. Well, I don't know about food from the Middle East.
                  Isn't that whole area a little iffy?
Hostess: [laughs] Hey, I'm no geographer. You and I -- why don't we
                  call it pocket bread, huh?
    Maude: [reading the ingredients list] Umm, what's tahini?
Hostess: Flavor sauce.
      Edna: And falafel?
Hostess: Crunch patties.
    Helen: So, we'd be selling foreign...
Hostess: Specialty foods. Here, try a Ben Franklin.
    Helen: [takes a bite] Mmm, that is good. What's in it?
      Chef: [poking his head out of a window, looking of Indian origin]
                  Tabbouleh and rezmi-kabob.
Hostess: [trying to cover-up] Uh, th-that's our chef... Christopher.

Re:no worries

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

So please, before you 'grrrr' at me, check your facts.

The "grrrr" wasn't directed at you. It was a parenthetical gripe at the slashdot editors, who, in my opinion, shouldn't have linked some random blog entry about a news story, and should have linking the actual news story instead.

In fact, I think we only have minor disagreements. You compare the Malaysian claim with AOCs; I think that comparison is bad because (a) AOCs are supposed to cover agricultural products, (b) AOCs are supposed to protect export markets for products that are tied to one specific locale. You answer that 'Feta' is an AOC based on a non-geographical name. I have to answer that that's a reasonable criticism of the 'Feta' AOC, but that at least that AOC does have the virtue of covering an actual export market for an agricultural product, something that I can't see the Malaysian recipes claim doing.

Re:no worries

[nospam007]

So yes, it would be illegal in Europe, for someone to make his own white cheese, even if he is using goat milk (i.e. the proper procedure), and call it Feta.

I make my own cheese, but I don't name it anything, I eat it.

Re:no worries

[postbigbang]

And the solution is to make feta cheese into something that doesn't claim to be Greek, but tastes the same. Who judges that it tastes the same? Business opportunity, methinks. It's the same thing with Parmasen cheese, Bordeaux, and so on.

So, FauxFeta. ErsatzBordeaux. Whatever. FakeFob Board Approval. We think it tastes the same. So sue us if you don't think so. Pit your ten samples against ours, and let Hizzoner decide.

And the laughable madness of the Malaysians will just make them frustrated. In fact, I think I'm make some tonight, whatever it is. Can't be tough.

Re:no worries

[Deisatru]

As long as I get my mt dew and doritoes, I dont care.

Re:no worries

[Nerdposeur]

Of course, since the grapes aren't actually grown in the oakanagan, the whole thing is a complete farce. But these wines are ending up on "BC wine lists", and being sold out liquor stores as "BC Wines" I don't know offhand but I wouldn't be surprised if California's good name is being similarly tainted by this practice.

Deception is bad. On the other hand, can you taste the difference? And if not, does it matter?

Re:no worries

[Anonymous Coward]

I make my own cheese, name it, give it love and affection and let it grow old, and when its just ripe...I eat it.

Re:no worries

[WNight]

It seems like it should be handled under truth in advertising laws, not trademarks, and especially not treaty-backed ones.

It's not California Champagne, because that's like saying France Italian! It's Champagne-style California-produced sparkling wine. They aren't Idaho potatoes unless produced in Idaho, but Idaho-style potatoes is accurate and reasonable.

Oh the crap we incorporate into law when we let one group demand special privilege.

Re:no worries

[milage]

Similar thing in New York with Sapporo beer. It says Export on the can but when you read it closely it is made in, and imported, from Canada rather than Japan..... Not quite the same!

Re:no worries

[HiThere]

Trademarks, Yes.
Copyrights, No.
Patents...prove that the process is original, recent, not publicly known, and non-obvious. And also clearly enough described that one "skilled in the art" can reproduce it. If so then yes, otherwise no.

Re:no worries

[pla]

I would not mind seeing where Slashdot stands on that issue

I can't speak for all of Slashdot, but I expect I share the opinion of most Slashdotters...

If someone can make a product identical to that from a given region (within the range of tolerances exhibited by that region itself), then they should have every right to call a spade a spade.

Feta, bourbon, scotch, champagne, whatever. The end product matters, not the location.

Now, in some cases, the location has historically determined the quality of the product, for various reasons... Scotch, for example, just doesn't turn out right without the cool wet summers and extremely mild winters that the Northern UK gets; Many French cheeses depend on the fungal spores and/or bacteria naturally present in the soil there. Modern technology can often correct for such reasons, however - Again with Scotch, the Japanese have nearly perfected a way of artificially controlling the environment that gives a product well within the range of "real" Scotch whiskey.

So basically... Results matter. Names don't, beyond letting me know what the package contains. And "where" does not count as part of "what".

Re:no worries

[Anonymous Coward]

So yes, it would be illegal in Europe, for someone to make his own white cheese, even if he is using goat milk (i.e. the proper procedure), and call it Feta.

I make my own cheese, but I don't name it anything, I eat it.

Speak for yourself. I call mine George.

Re:no worries

[pavon]

I think you meant that you can't call California sparkling wine "Champagne", which is true for the reason you outlined.

Yes, you can. I'm pretty sure none of the cheap bottles of champagne we buy for New Years were imported. For example, any of these.

Okay, here's the applicable law. The US considers champagne to be a semi-generic term, and isn't protected the same way that some other terms are.

Re:no worries

[vux984]

Deception is bad. On the other hand, can you taste the difference? And if not, does it matter?

Me, I admit probably not. There are grapes and wines that I like and grapes and wines that I don't, but I certainly couldn't call an Eastern Europe wine from a BC or California wine. That said, there are people who can. And think about it... the croatian wineries that can stand on their own name don't need to be deceptive. So the fraud wine is lower end stuff from eastern europe. the point here is that its not a good eastern european wine passing itself off as an Oakangan product, its usually a fairly poor one.

And yes it matters. Its bad for the BC and California wine business. The fraud wines are illegitmately increasing their marketshare through deception, and by necessity this decreases the marketshare of legitimate wineries by the same amount.

It also undermines my intention to buy locally when I select a BC wine. (And American intentions are similiarly undermined when they select wines purporting to be from California.)

Plus as the quality of the product is genuinely lower, it lowers the established reputation for quality from these regions. The Oakangan and the Napa Valley are both prime locations for growing grapes, and the wine from these locations is consistently very good... thus low quality eastern european wine damages their reputation (which in turn devalues the legitimate product...the whole "I don't see what all the fuss is about. This high falutin Napa Valley bottle doesn't taste any better than the cheap house wine we drank in Serbia." sort of situation. Well no shit, turns out its the same wine.

Re:no worries

[OldSoldier]

This is GREAT! If we can just get a good parody going that makes direct references to the music mafia then perhaps that would exemplify how crazy the music mafia really is.

sales of a recipe book would generate royalties similar to how sales of sheet music does.
cooking a recipe would be a "performance" and would generate royalties similar to playing (someone else's music) at an auditorium
eating food prepared from a recipe would be similar to buying music
and... sampling/taste testing

And before long I won't be able to eat at all without generating royalties for someone.

crazy crazy crazy.

Re:no worries

[vux984]

Yes, you can. I'm pretty sure none of the cheap bottles of champagne we buy for New Years were imported

As the law you pointed out yourself indicated, you can't call them "Champagne" in isolation.

You -can- use the word champagne, provided, amongst other things you directly join it with its true origin. For example, "California Champagne" is ok. The point is that for the semi generics, you have to be very upfront about where they really come from.

Re:no worries

[raju1kabir]

What Malaysia is claiming is that they own the "copyright" to these food and that no one else is allowed to even produce it elsewhere.

I don't see that in TFA. It just says that they want some the dishes to be declared as "Malaysian".

Which is sort of stupid, since almost everyone in Malaysia with a famous recipe is a relatively recent immigrant - only the indigenous people have been around for any significant amount of time and the government treats them like shit.

But it's not particularly aggressive or contentious. Just a typical Malaysian government waste of time.

Re:no worries

[Superpants]

There is also the factor of poor weather and crop yield creating a necessity to import grapes in order to actually have production at all. It is misleading, but a fair argument against prejudice towards region.

BTW, it's Okanagan...we aren't known for our oak trees or casks.

Re:no worries

[bugi]

weight problem solved

Re:no worries

[vux984]

There is also the factor of poor weather and crop yield creating a necessity to import grapes in order to actually have production at all.

Then their should be less "BC wine" that year.

Note that I don't really object to the importation of grapes, especially in the event of a poor yield... I think its good that they do something so that they have -something- to sell that year. I just object to calling it a "BC wine" at that point.

BTW, it's Okanagan...we aren't known for our oak trees or casks.

lol. thanks for the correction. I knew it looked off.

Re:no worries

[Nethead]

Hey! Don't forget some of the great Yakima Valley wines! More local for you than on of those California brands. Do you really want your wine to have to take a long, hot trip up I-5 from damn near Mexico?

Re:no worries

[Nethead]

I wonder if Canada will try to trademark BC Bud?

Re:no worries

[zotz]

"I make my own cheese, but I don't name it anything, I eat it."

Well.... try naming it Bob first. It might taste better. Or perhaps Carrol would be more to your liking?

Re:no worries

[dunkelfalke]

It is as stupid as calling generic products by some brand name (and AOC is not much different than a brand name) - like kleenex for a paper tissue for example.

Re:no worries

[quenda]

You can still produce sparking wine in the Napa Valley, but you can't claim it came from the Champagne region.

You can't even call it Champagne without the EU/French threatening trade restrictions. Australia gave in and stopped using the word, though we still have local Port wine.
That is just as ridiculous. There is no legitimate basis for a trademark claim on Champagne. What next? Will the Germans insist that all hamburgers must come from Hamburg?
So McDonalds will be forced to sell "American minced animal parts" instead? Must our Danish pastries now be imported from Denmark?
And will Tarantino be forced to film all his Mexican Standoffs in Mexico?

Re:no worries

[Tim4444]

Isn't most Malaysian food just a knockoff of other foods (including Chinese) in the first place?

Re:no worries

[Anonymous Coward]

Just to clarify - the Malaysian government treat non-indigenous people like shit. It sounds opposite from the way you describe it.

Re:no worries

[Anonymous Coward]

You've got it backwards. Let's use the hamburger example. Germans can insist all they want that anything called a 'hamburger' must come from Hamburg, but that will never make it so under any current legal system.

However, if the public comes to associate hamburgers with Hamburg, and would be confused buying a hamburger expecting it to necessarily come from Hamburg, then yes, the protection could apply.

Sure, in part we're protecting the seller's/collective's reputation to their benefit, but we're also protecting the public and their idea of what a name should mean. It would be chaos otherwise.

Re:no worries

[mrdtr]

Actually that is an example of all food labelling in Canada, the current law allows it, a good portion of our food is grown or produced elsewhere but then is packaged in Canada, or the final processing of the food happens here, so it gets the made in Canada label allowed.
I thought I read somewhere that rule was going to be changed, but I can't remember.

Re:no worries

[vux984]

Actually that is an example of all food labelling in Canada, the current law allows it, a good portion of our food is grown or produced elsewhere but then is packaged in Canada, or the final processing of the food happens here, so it gets the made in Canada label allowed.

Yes, that's a general problem, and yes the 'made in Canada' label rules are a bit messed up and abused, and yes the rules are apparently under review. Hopefully under the new rules a substantial quantity of the primary ingredients will have to actually originate in Canada. But even if they do correct that defect, it won't stop people from claiming "Proudly packaged in Canada" and therefore not using the official regulated label and claim text, and simply relying on people to not clue in that "Proudly packaged in Canada" is actually different from "Product of Canada" and that for something to claim it was proudly packaged in canada all it has to do is in fact be packaged here, even if they tighten the regulations for the "Product of Canada" claim.

And with wine -- that's sort of where its at now. They are simply claiming 'bottled in the Okanagan, BC' which is true. And as long as that's all they claim, there is nothing that can be done to stop them. They aren't abusing a loose regulation... they are telling the actual truth. So fixing the rules won't help... they'll still be allowed to claim it was bottled in BC because it was.

What needs to happen is that BC wines need to first establish a seal and label with rules that it only be used on BC grown grapes, and second, educate consumers and retailers to look for that seal, and to differentiate between the "bottled in BC' claim and the 'grown in BC' claim.

Re:no worries

[raju1kabir]

Just to clarify - the Malaysian government treat non-indigenous people like shit. It sounds opposite from the way you describe it.

The Malaysian government treats indigenous people (Kadazan, Iban, Dusun, etc.) like shit. Then it invents and reinforces a fiction that the plurality-race Malays are indigenous, which they are clearly not, and showers them with privilege in the name of defending the natives. This further marginalises the actual indigenous people.

It's like if the American government had special laws to favour indigenous people, and interpreted them as covering white people, since some of them were there a few years longer than the Africans and the Asians.

Re:no worries

[the_womble]

Of course not, because that would be an outright lie. It was produced in Napa Valley, USA not the Champagne, France, so of course you can't claim it came from Champagne, France.

I think you meant that you can't call California sparkling wine "Champagne", which is true for the reason you outlined.

The problem with that is that the average consumer says "Champagne" to mean sparkling wine (if they are slightly more sophisticated they mean sparkling wine produced using the methode Champenoise , so it is not really misleading to call it Champagne.

The EU goes further and bans the use of the term méthode Champenoise. The point of this is not to stop consumers being mislead, it is to protect producers from competition.

Re:no worries

[olliM]

From wikipedia:

Objectives of the protection

As with other intellectual property rights, the use of geographical indications is intended to increase the income of rightholders. The preambles to the Regulations cite consumer demand for quality foodstuffs and identify a number of goals for the protection regimes:

• the promotion of products with specific characteristics, particularly those coming from less-favoured or rural areas;
• the improvement of the income of farmers, in return for a "genuine effort to improve quality";
• the retention of population in rural areas;
• the provision of clear and succinct information to consumers regarding product origin.

The provision of a recompense for efforts to improve quality and the need for consumer protection are often cited as justifications for trade mark protection in other domains, and geographical indications operate in a similar manner to trade marks.

I think the last one is very important: I want to know whether I'm eating Greek feta or other "white cheese" - very often I'll choose the cheaper, non protected option, but at least as a consumer I'm able to make an informed choice. And alot of these protected products are much more obscure parts of traditional diets, they need special treatement if we want to preserve them in our markets.

So basically... Results matter. Names don't, beyond letting me know what the package contains. And "where" does not count as part of "what".

If you feel like this, you should have no problem with only Champagne region sparkling wines being called Champagne - you can just choose any sparkling wine that you prefer and ignore the name. For those of us who like to make the distinction, it's good to have the power of the EU on our side.

Re:no worries

[mcvos]

The problem with that is that the average consumer says "Champagne" to mean sparkling wine (if they are slightly more sophisticated they mean sparkling wine produced using the methode Champenoise , so it is not really misleading to call it Champagne.

I think this can vary a lot per region, country, culture, social group, etc. To some, "Champagne" means "sparkling wine", to others it means "sparkling wine from the Champagne region".

As an interesting note: I recently learned that due to high demand, the Champagne region has been expanded.

Re:no worries

[pla]

I think the last one is very important: I want to know whether I'm eating Greek feta or other "white cheese"

Why? Feta I'll admit makes a bad example for my stance, because what most Americans think of as feta has almost nothing to do with its namesake (hell, most commercial ones use cow milk). But in my area, I know of a number of local cheesemakers who produce sheepsmilk feta every bit as "real" as anything you'd get from Greece. If the same product, why does the "where" matter?

Or to reduce the problem to the level of absurdity, if a Greek cheesemaker moved to the US, imported his small flock of sheep, fed them imported Greek grasses, and made cheese from their milk using the same starter culture his family has kept for generations... Why does that not count as "feta" in every meaningful sense of the name? And before you call this unrealistic, with the exception of importing the grasses, most of the regionally-named products we could discuss in this context came from very similar situations - An immigrant makes a food from his culture, calls it by the correct name, and finds a market exists for it in his new country.


If you feel like this, you should have no problem with only Champagne region sparkling wines being called Champagne - you can just choose any sparkling wine that you prefer and ignore the name. For those of us who like to make the distinction, it's good to have the power of the EU on our side.

If always as simple and descriptive an alternative as "sparkling wine" existed, we might not have this discussion (Though I still see no compelling reason not to call it "champagne" unless it actually materially differs). With other products, however, this gets a whole lot trickier. Simple example, cheddar vs gloucester (or really just about any hard aged cow-milk cheeses). Describe those in three or fewer words that unambiguously convey the contents, as distinct from every other similar hard aged cow-milk cheese. I couldn't do it, and consider myself something of a connoisseur (sorry, "a person of discriminating taste" - Wouldn't want to usurp a label from some unknown region of France) of them.

Re:no worries

[emilper]

You should look into how wine is made now ... it does not matter if the grape is from Croatia or from Nepal ... it does not even matter if they actually use grapes (though probably it would be a bit cheaper) ... too little sun that summer, then add sugar, too much, add something else ... and so on. Had my visit to a winery a few years back, and I don't drink shop bough wine since, got an uncle who makes his own, and if it's too sour I can add sugar myself if I want, no need to pay good money on pink colored coke ...

Re:no worries

[emilper]

Many French cheeses depend on the fungal spores and/or bacteria naturally present in the soil there

Thank you for proving me right not to eat moldy French cheese ... I always new they were putting dirt on the rolls.

Now, really ... if you can tell a "French" cheese from a cheese with fancy mound made someplace else without doing a DNA test on it, you must be Superman.

Depends on the country and/or food.

[blcamp]

I don't think anyone is going to challenge Scotland's copyright of haggis.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Perhaps not, but to be on the safe side, I advise Scots to patent the genome of Haggis scoticus.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[MrHanky]

Or, rather, the Champagne district's right to Champagne and the Cognac district's right to Cognac.

There's nothing unique in the attempt to protect the designation of origin.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[JasterBobaMereel]

Haggis: brought to Scotland (before it was Scotland) by either the Romans, Vikings, or another group, via most of Europe ....

Not a regional food at all ...

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[wastedlife]

According to that article, the U.S. does not generally recognize protection of the designation of origin, unless it is for products made within the U.S. Apparently you can have American champagne, but vidalia onions can only come the Vidalia, Georgia region.

However, I'm pretty sure protection of designation of origin is not covered under copywrite laws.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[wastedlife]

Fuck, I need more caffeine, "copyright". Wheres the damn edit button?

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Zocalo]

Especially in the EU as far as I know, although I've never really found a satisfactory citation for it. If a product incorporates a place of origin in the name such as "Cornish Pastry", "Cumberland Sausage", and any number of cheeses etc., then apparently it has to have actually have been made the the geographical location being referred to, even if the recipe is identical. Another bright idea brought to you by the numbnuts that spent taxpayers money in order to regulate the permitted curvature of bananas...

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Abcd1234]

Oh come on, give haggis a break already! It's really not that bad, and in fact has been described as having "an excellent nutty texture and delicious savoury flavour" (source of source)... 'course, as with all foods, it'll vary based on who made it.

I urge you, give haggis a chance! I actually rather like it! Black pudding, OTOH... *shudder*

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Dishevel]

They are just the only people "special" enough to eat it.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[mcgrew]

Haggis, as well as falafel, tabouleh and baba gannouj are already in the public domain. People have been eating these and calling them by their names for hundreds and in some cases thousands of years. You can't copyright The Illiad, although you could copyright a derivative work. Likewise you can't copyright a hamburger or french fries, but you can trademark "Acme Hamburgers" and copyright the packaging. That wouldn't stop anyone from selling hamburgers, only using your package art and trademark.

It's only Monday and already I think I've seen the dumbest idea I'll see all week. WTF? Is the world really run by idiots?

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[corbettw]

Funny, that's how Austin Powers described Fat Bastard's feces. Doesn't make me want to try that, either.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[xaxa]

How is it stupid?

Many people want, for example, to know that their champagne comes from Champagne, and that their cornish pasty is from Cornwall. It's a simple consumer protection measure.

No one is stopping you from buying "meat and potato pasty" (made in Leeds) if you prefer, or the sparkling wine (made in Germany).

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Dog-Cow]

oops.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[DoofusOfDeath]

I don't think anyone is going to challenge Scotland's copyright of haggis.

Attribution for haggis is controlled by slander laws, not copyright.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[onkelonkel]

No such thing as a "Cornish Pastry" - should be "Cornish Pasty", without the r.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[dougisfunny]

Do you really have to ask?

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[elrous0]

It was brought there because no one else wanted it.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[WindBourne]

Odd; My wife was born in England and attended COE schools. She had haggis every friday and she does not describe it with the same terms as either you or wiki does. Needless to say, she has outlawed it EVER being in our house.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Zocalo]

It's stupid because of the bit about the recipe and lack of any concession to where ingredients are sourced or whether the production process used is identical.

As an example, historically (and we're talking at least a thousand years, since it gets mentioned in the Domesday Book) Cheshire cheese was manufactured by the same process in no less than five counties; Cheshire itself, plus Denbighshire, Flintshire, Shropshire and Staffordshire. The first two of those are in Wales, while the latter two and Cheshire itself are in England. According to the EU rules, only Cheshire cheese which is manufactured in Cheshire itself is now entitled to the name, despite all of the historical precedent to the contrary.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[WindBourne]

BTW, had to laugh about the black pudding. I assume that is basically Blutwurst. When I was in Germany working, I had some of that. That had to be about the blandest sausage that I have ever tried. Did not care for it just based on that. Had they put in some spices to it, say some Habenero, that might have improved it.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[h4rm0ny]

A friend of mine worked in a hotel in Yorkshire where they served Black Pudding. A group of americans asked her what it was and she told them but they wouldn't believe her. I mean they actually would not believe that this was a dish that British people ate, despite repeated assertions. I had a similar reaction when I tried to get some americans to enjoy the delicious taste of Marmite.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[mcgrew]

One of my 17 freaks must have mod points today. No problem, everybody gets modded down once in a while. This (my comment I'm typing now) comment should be modded down, as it's offtopic.

Whoever modded that "troll" is an idiot. That's falmebait as well, so mod me down.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[MrHanky]

It most certainly isn't under copyright law, but then again, I'm fairly certain techdirt's writeup is incorrect. Most stories that reach Slashdot are.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Joce640k]

Haggis is damn tasty, absolutely nothing bad about it. Less icky than a pork pie.

Black pudding ... more of an "acquired taste".

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[geminidomino]

Is the world really run by idiots?

Yes. Absolutely. With no qualifications.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[zevans]

...which in itself no longer has any meaning given the amorphous nature of Cheshire's borders. The majority of Cheshire farms have been in Manchester or Merseyside at least once in the last 40 years (never mind the last 400.)

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Abcd1234]

To be fair, there's probably plenty of perfectly fine foods that COE schools turned people off of. :)

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Hurricane78]

What you call "black pudding" is apparently similar to the German "Blutwurst" (literally "blood sausage"). And there is a variant that is meant to be broiled. If you get offered it, try it. Opposite to what you might think it very tasty, and goes well with boiled potatoes (topped with parsley and butter) and a endive salad (with a bit of mustard in cream, oil and vinegar as a dressing).

We ate it traditionally when we were kids and were on vacation at my Luxemburgish grandma's house. Only some years later did we learn that it was "Blutwurst". We didn't stop eating it. :)

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

Raised by Hungarian grandparents, called it Hoolka, (i am sure not the right spelling)
Never knew what it was made of till I went to Scotland and tried Haggis.
Looked at everyone on my table and almost yelled "Hoolka"
They thought I was nuts for liking it.
Everyone on the table passed their plates to me......

Went back to the bus, Full, and Happy.

Cannot find it here in Western Mass.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

If only Haggis was scottish my friend... better look up your source ;)

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Dragonslicer]

Fuck, I need more caffeine, "copyright". Wheres the damn edit button?

The edit button was stolen by the copywriters.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or of Scotch Whiskey?

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Abcd1234]

Heh, fair enough... I just find the idea of eating congealed blood + fillers a little... disturbing. But, hey, I'll eat (nearly) anything once. :)

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Menkhaf]

I presume that you're talking about blood sausage, a type of sausage made from coagulated (pigs) blood. In Denmark it is eaten around Christmas by some, fried on a pan, served on rye bread and lightly drizzled with syrup.

Of course, since it's an old dish, that might be why it tastes bland -- the need for using ALL of the pig for food is simply not there any more.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[liquidsin]

not true. many of them are perfectly correct before reaching slashdot.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[MichaelSmith]

she has outlawed it EVER being in our house.

Gee, my wife is Malaysian and I wish she would outlaw durians.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

They'll have to catch one first. Slippery beggars!

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[halcyon1234]

You just don't know how to handle Black Pudding properly. You have to corner it, hit it with a blunt weapon until it splits, and repeat until you've racked up a ton of XP.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[cffrost]

Black pudding, OTOH... *shudder*

LUNCH TEACHER: "How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?"
SCHOOL KID: "Oh bugger off, lunch-muppet... 'Tis me mum's meat-pudding. Bloody brilliant, init? Now leave me alone, lest I whale you about the ol' gulliver with me cricket stick.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was unaware Haggis HAD a genetic structure.....it may be alive, but not life as WE know it at all!

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[kauttapiste]

Haha. I learned only this summer that the haggis is "marketed" to the US tourists as this small round animal. You could buy little haggis soft toys at the souvenir shops!

Sitation required? http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/nov/27/travelnews.travel

Another ridicule on the american tourist was the Edinburgh castle's tourist guide's anecdote about an american asking whether the coastline behind the bay (the Forth?) that you can see from the castle might be France?

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[wall0159]

Haggis gets a bad rap - I think because the name sounds like someone being sick. It's really just a sausage.

A good haggis is really tasty, and I highly recommend you try it.
(you can also buy vegetarian haggis, if you don't like the idea of eating offal (though that's no different to _most_ sausages)

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially in the EU as far as I know, although I've never really found a satisfactory citation for it. If a product incorporates a place of origin in the name such as "Cornish Pastry", "Cumberland Sausage", and any number of cheeses etc., then apparently it has to have actually have been made the the geographical location being referred to, even if the recipe is identical.

No, this is a gross distortion of reality. Cheddar cheese is a good counter-example. Although Cheddar is a specific place in Somerset famed for its locally produced cheese, anyone anywhere can make and sell Cheddar cheese. It is regarded as a generic term and cannot be protected. However, the term 'West Country Farmhouse Cheddar' *is* protected (quite reasonably in my opinion - I would *not* expect such a product to come from anywhere else than the West Country).
Only specific products get geographical name protection (PGI - Protected Geographical Indication). It has to be applied for and various fairly rigourous criteria met. So the number of protected products is quite small, and there is absolutely no default or general geographic name protection.

Cornish Pasties (not pastries) and Cumberland Sausages, which you mention specifically are *not* currently protected but applications for PGI have been made.

You should get your facts right before embarking on an anti-EU rant. The majority of anti-EU propaganda in UK newspapers is either downright lies or gross exaggeration.
 

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

As per my previous comment re cheddar, you're completely wrong about Cheshire as well. Another generic term, as are most British cheese names including such as Lancashire and Wensleydale.

The definitive information on this subject seems to be here:
http://www.cheeseboard.co.uk/facts/faqs-31

See the section titled:
"Can all British cheeses be produced in any part of the country or are there some cheeses that can only be produced in specific areas?"

Next time you post, how about a quick fact-check to avoid talking crap?

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

I love eating haggis, but I still had to mod this funny.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Anonymous Coward]

Except for the English. Recently discovered references in an English recipe book contains the earliest recorded recipe for haggis.

Link

I doubt it will change anybodies perception of haggis as a Scottish dish (least of all us Scots according to that bbc article :/) but it would be good grounds to prevent a copyright ruling - just in-case anyone gets any daft ideas from your joke.

I'll personally never understand the pride invested in that odd excuse for a meal. We managed to create something barely edible from the scraps left over by our lords, the bits of meat that even dogs turn their noses up at - 300 years later and we're trying to flog it as a connoisseurs delicacy to every patsy country that will take it off our hands.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[mcvos]

When we visited Edinburgh, we did try haggis, and it's pretty good, actually. Of course being a vegetarian, I had the vegetarian haggis (without the blood and sheep guts), but I also had a bite of the real stuff, and it was nowhere near as horrid as I'd expected.

Re:Depends on the country and/or food.

[Abcd1234]

Unless, that is, you don't have erodeproof equipment, in which case you just trash your stuff. Stupid things...

Just like Europe

[R2.0]

Champagne, etc. Italy tried to do the same thing with Parmesan.

Although, those are foodstuffs. Copywriting the names of dishes...

Re:Just like Europe

[spun]

Wrong. Those are designations of origins. Champagne and Parma are actual places. You can make parmesan or champagne, but you can't call it such (in Europe, anyway) because such a designation would denote that the foodstuff actually came from that region, and if it sucked, it would reflect poorly on the region. In the USA, a syrup producer in Kansas could not call their product 'Vermont maple syrup.' Calling a cheese 'Parmesan' or a sparkling wine 'Champagne' is like calling a syrup 'Vermont.'

AFAIK, Hummus, falafel, and so forth are generic names for foods traditional to dozens of countries. Nasi lemak means 'rice in cream' and is also not a designation of origin, therefore, attempting to copyright it is ridiculous and no other country is going to honor Malaysia's demands. Not that we in the US honor Europe's protected designations of origins anyway.

Re:Just like Europe

[Threni]

Same as in the UK. Cornish Pasties, Yorkshire Pudding etc. Just give it another name and you're sorted.

Re:Just like Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

Same with feta. Only feta produced in Greece can be called feta.

Re:Just like Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

Very true. It is equally distressing to know that some firms in the US had attempted to claim patents over some South-Asian spices like Turmeric (as a whole against a specific medicinal chemical compound in it). This whole business of copyrights over foods needs to be sorted out.

Re:Just like Europe

[moose_hp]

Tequila can only be named as such if it is made in Jalisco, Mexico (I don't remember if it have to actually be made in the the town of Tequila or it can be anywhere in the state), however there is no restriction on the production, you can actually make tequila, but not name it "Tequila".

Re:Just like Europe

[Gnavpot]

Wrong. Those are designations of origins. Champagne and Parma are actual places.

[...]

AFAIK, Hummus, falafel, and so forth are generic names for foods traditional to dozens of countries. Nasi lemak means 'rice in cream' and is also not a designation of origin, therefore, attempting to copyright it is ridiculous and no other country is going to honor Malaysia's demands.

I can think of at least one example of a protected food name which has nothing to do with origin. Feta cheese:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0DQA/is_2002_Nov_7/ai_94448045/

Re:Just like Europe

[FooAtWFU]

The problem with Parmesan and Champagne is there's not a good generic term for foodstuffs of that type not from that origin, whereas if you could get decent maple syrup outside of Vermont you could call it "maple syrup" and people would actually understand what it is.

I'm all for reasonable PDO's where there's a meaningful common generic name for the product; it's basic truth-in-advertising.

Re:Just like Europe

[Shakrai]

In the USA, a syrup producer in Kansas could not call their product 'Vermont maple syrup.' Calling a cheese 'Parmesan' or a sparkling wine 'Champagne' is like calling a syrup 'Vermont.'

No it's not. The difference is that Vermont maple syrup has never been sold as just "Vermont". It's sold as "Vermont maple syrup". For better or worse "Champagne" has become a genericized trademark. Nobody (besides a few wine snobs and angry Frenchmen) is going to look at you funny if you request 'champagne' instead of 'sparkling wine'.

Re:Just like Europe

[viper34j]

I don't know about you but I'd take some Vermont on my pancakes any day...

Re:Just like Europe

[Schnoogs]

That's like saying an American company can't sell French Fries if they were made in Idaho. I can call the syrup I make in my backyard Vermont Syrup all I want.

Re:Just like Europe

[Kozz]

Wrong. Those are designations of origins. Champagne and Parma are actual places. You can make parmesan or champagne, but you can't call it such (in Europe, anyway) because such a designation would denote that the foodstuff actually came from that region, and if it sucked, it would reflect poorly on the region.

I wonder if there's any laws in Mexico (or US) for the product known as Tequila. Contrast Tequila with mezcal, and only the latter ever contains a "worm", etc.

Re:Just like Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

Sparkling White Wine from California, anyone?

How about some powdered cheese?(I know, not the same as Parmesan, and can be other cheeses, but if the shoe fits...)

Re:Just like Europe

[Runaway1956]

In the US, we sidestep silly restrictions such as your "Vermont syrup" example. Wisconsin cheese is constantly being trucked into California, taken out of the boxes, dropped into other boxes labeled "Packaged in California" with no hint of it's origins.

Customers are suckers, aren't they?

Re:Just like Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

Champagne and Parma are actual places.

So what? Sounds like a protection racket to me. It's not about pride or political correctness. It's about money.

Jack Daniel's can't legally call itself a Bourbon, even though it's a higher quality bourbon than many "real" bourbons. The protection racket exists simply to horde the money. You didn't think it was for your benefit, did you?

You can get a "Philly Cheesesteak" just about anywhere in the US, but that's irrelevant to somebody who judges by quality. Imagine how absurd it would be to shut down the thousands of fake phillies all over the country just to benefit some rat who's got the law on his side.

Re:Just like Europe

[Dahamma]

Sparkling wine is correct - though you it's mostly the French-owned companies (like Chandon) that call it that, plenty of the CA wineries call their sparking wine "champagne" (no capital C at least...)

But "powdered cheese"?!? You my friend, have clearly never made it past basic Kraft cheese food products. Have you ever had good Parmesean reggiano? Or in your culinary world, does Velveeta == cheddar?

Re:Just like Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about you but I'd take some Vermont on my pancakes any day...

As in some "Ben & Jerry's"???

Re:Just like Europe

[DaveV1.0]

By definition, Champagne (the beverage) comes exclusively from the Champagne region of France. Everything else is "Sparkling white wine".

The United States have recognized the exclusive nature of this name, yet maintain a legal structure that allows longtime domestic producers of sparkling wine to continue to use the term "champagne" under specific circumstances. Some states have laws banning this usage.

If, for decades if not centuries, Maple syrup was only available from Vermont, from specific Maple trees whose export was banned, using a technique that was a secret known only to people from Vermont, as was the case for Champagne, then Maple syrup might be known as "Vermont".

Re:Just like Europe

[istartedi]

I'd take some Vermont on my pancakes any day

Would you like the sandy loam or the loose clay?

Re:Just like Europe

[eldepeche]

Bourbon is not a protected geographical indicator, it is a style of whiskey. Jack Daniel's is not a Bourbon whiskey, it is a Tennessee whiskey. It tastes nothing like Bourbons of the same price range.

Re:Just like Europe

[spun]

That's like saying an American company can't sell French Fries if they were made in Idaho. I can call the syrup I make in my backyard Vermont Syrup all I want.

Not without a law suit you can't. French Fries are a recipe, not an ingredient. Try selling Idaho russet potatoes that aren't from Idaho and see how long you last.

Re:Just like Europe

[spun]

A Philly cheese-steak is a recipe not an ingredient. As I mentioned, you can't claim a syrup is from Vermont if it isn't. These food producing regions always have local quality control boards that ensure products from those regions meet certain standards. Someone from outside those regions could tarnish the name of the region by producing inferior products while piggy backing on the popularity of the quality controlled ingredients that actually come from the place and pass the local quality control standards.

Re:Just like Europe

[spun]

That decision, which only holds weight in the EU, comes from a case that is, in my mind, legitimate. Belgium was selling a cow's milk cheese as feta, which is totally wrong. I'm pretty sure 'feta' is semi-generic in the US. But it sure as heck better be a salty, white sheep's milk cheese and not some cow's milk knock off. Blech.

Re:Just like Europe

[tabrnaker]

Of course, Tequila is from blue agave, everything else is mezcal.

Of course, mexico is big on corruption.

Re:Just like Europe

[LanMan04]

Let me get you a "facial tissue" to help with that runny nose.

Oh wait, of course I meant "Kleenex".

Re:Just like Europe

[jonbryce]

In England, we call them "chips". The things you call chips, we call "crisps".

Re:Just like Europe

[tabrnaker]

Doesn't have to be made in Jalisco, just the blue agave is sourced from Jalisco. Use another type of agave in Jalisco and then it's Mezcal.

Re:Just like Europe

[Balthisar]

Well, within Mexico, tequila can only be made in the state of Jalisco and a small portion of the state of Guanajuato. It's also only to be made of blue Weber agave, which is a type of maguey. Tequila is a subset of the mezcales, and there are other mezcales, like bacanora. Other mezcales can be made with other types of maguey.

Internationally, "tequila" was granted an OAC in 1977, but the USA doesn't recognize OAC as pointed out in so many other posts. Instead, the USA (and presumably other countries) depend on trade agreements to protect specific names, and that's the case with tequila in the USA.

Re:Just like Europe

[spun]

Look, that's just putting a band-aid on the problem. You can't just xerox a product to make an identical copy.

Re:Just like Europe

[Balthisar]

And in a tiny little stub of Guanajuato, too. No, it doesn't have to me made in the town of Tequila. Penjamo, Guanajuato makes a tequila that I'm very fond of, for example.

Re:Just like Europe

[russotto]

I wonder if there's any laws in Mexico (or US) for the product known as Tequila. Contrast Tequila with mezcal, and only the latter ever contains a "worm", etc.

Yes, IIRC in both countries Tequila must be derived at least 50% (100% if marked "100% de Agave", which is the only kind worth buying) from the syrup of the blue agave, grown in the state of Jalisco.

I'm not sure about mezcal.

Re:Just like Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Mexico has rules about what can be called tequila and who can market their mezcal as tequila. Mescal itself is protected by International Denomination of Origin. The worm is prohibited from bottled tequila as it could infer the agave plants used were bug infested and of inferior quality, though it should be noted that mescal/tequila is distilled. They have to add a worm to the bottle.

Re:Just like Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

Pisco is interesting in that legally in Chile the pisco (liquor distilled from grapes, don't call it grappa) made in Pisco (located on the coast of Peru) is not real pisco. Chilean pisco can only be made from certain grapes and is of much consistant quality than Peruvian pisco, which has a great deal of variety.

Re:Just like Europe

[BluBrick]

Same as in the UK. Cornish Pasties, Yorkshire Pudding etc. Just give it another name and you're sorted.

Not quite. You do have to give it a name that's not so ridiculous that people will actually use the name you're trying to avoid. Some mob here in Australia has been trying for about 10 years to market cornish pasties under the name "Tiddly Oggie". To this day, I've never heard anyone else call them anything other than a pastie.

Are you listening to me, Ferguson Plarre? It's not a tiddly-anything, it's a fucking pastie! The battle is over - you lost!

EU take note as well. You can legislate what's printed on the label, but you can't legislate what we think. The label might say "sparkling Pinot Noir Chardonnay from the Barossa Valley", but you can't fool me - I know it's really "Champagne".

Re:Just like Europe

[daveime]

This conversation is giving me a headache. Anyone got an aspirin ?

Re:Just like Europe

[Rand310]

China has an interesting version of this. There are 52 minority ethnic groups in China, remember, 52 exactly. What the government has done is allow those groups to get a kind of royalty fee for distribution of those ethnic foods in non-ethnic regions. For example, if a big restaurant wants to serve 'GuiZhou Fish' then the peoples (government, some organization, I'm not sure...) of GuiZhou get some cut of the profits from that food. An interesting concept. Might serve them well. I can see no less reason why it's appropriate than any other intellectual property. If you concede that a product is simply the sum of parts + assembly, then why not ingredient + recipe?

Re:Just like Europe

[Gnavpot]

That decision, which only holds weight in the EU, comes from a case that is, in my mind, legitimate. Belgium was selling a cow's milk cheese as feta, which is totally wrong. I'm pretty sure 'feta' is semi-generic in the US. But it sure as heck better be a salty, white sheep's milk cheese and not some cow's milk knock off. Blech.

I guess you skipped the part which said "only ... in certain regions of Greece will be allowed to be described as feta".

So the "feta" description is owned by Greece. Other countries in the EU cannot produce feta, even if they use milk from sheep.

Re:Just like Europe

[spun]

That exact cheese is made in dozens of countries. Only in Greece is it called 'feta.' The most common name for the cheese is some variant of 'sirenje.' So call it that and be done with it. Feta means Greek cheese, even though it isn't a specific place-name.

Re:Just like Europe

[Handover Phist]

If you could get decent maple syrup outside of Vermont you would call it Canadian.

LOL

[zoomshorts]

Malaysia is a melange of 5 or more cultures. Good luck.

Re:LOL

[MichaelSmith]

Malaysia is a melange of 5 or more cultures. Good luck.

They mean Malay food. If it was possible for me to get decent malay food outside Malaysia this would worry me. But as it stands I doubt nothing would change.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Indonesia is very ticked off

[Vinegar Joe]

Because Malaysia has been claiming certain Indonesian dances are Malaysian.

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/09/16/issue-%E2%80%98betawi-group-threatens-harass-malaysians%E2%80%99.html

Re:Indonesia is very ticked off

[NotQuiteReal]

Meh. They all look the same to me.

Re:Indonesia is very ticked off

[raju1kabir]

Actually, no, it was the Discovery Channel who made that claim and since apologised for it.

Re:Indonesia is very ticked off

[Anonymous Coward]

That was revealed as a mistake from the Discovery Channel's side. They made a clip promoting Malaysia that accidentally included a clip of Indonesian dance.

http://thejakartaglobe.com/home/malaysian-dance-outrage-ends-up-as-a-mis-step/325729>"http://thejakartaglobe.com/home/malaysian-dance-outrage-ends-up-as-a-mis-step/325729 [thejakartaglobe.com].

From the article:

"A firestorm of Internet outrage over the supposed theft of the Balinese pendet dance for a Malaysian tourism ad turned out to be just hot air on Monday, when the Discovery TV network owned up and said that the dancers had appeared in one of its own TV promotions, and it was all a mistake anyway."

There is a difference betweeen a dish and a food

[Anonymous Coward]

"Malaysia is trying to declare that it owns popular Malaysian dishes, like nasi lemak."

Frankly, who gives a shit? I've never heard of it. Is there a massive export market?

Now, they might be claiming ownership of certain FOODS, like Champagne, parmesan, or other foods that are restricted by place of origin.

And even if they claim ownership, that is just a label. Nothing stops other people from making wine "methode champenoise" or food that tastes exactly the same.

RMS

[K. S. Kyosuke]

RMS has been making recipe analogies (with respect to free software) for decades. Finally, the until-recently-lawless world of cooking is catching up with the highly developed and modern law-abiding world of software. That will teach our bearded gourmet! There's no free(-as-in-speech) lunch!

Re:RMS

[rajanala83]

better don't try his weisswurst and brezn.

Re:RMS

[fluffy99]

I think you just described all the flavors of Linux! They all follow the same general recipe, but they are all slightly different after baked/compiled. One company likes to add a splash of gnome, the other likes kde, etc. Naturally this plays hell at a banquet when the guests see the bowl labeled with the name of the dish but have no idea if their utensils will work quite right with that particular homemade dish. They prefer the storebought box of mac-n-cheese that tastes the same every single time and they don't need to worry if their fork is somehow incompatible with todays version of the corn kernels in the dish.

Egads, I think I abused the hell out of that analogy. Should I have done a car analogy instead? :}

Re:RMS

[Culture20]

That will teach our bearded gourmet! There's no free(-as-in-speech) lunch!

I think you meant to write:

That will teach our beard gourmet! There's no free(-as-in-beer) after-lunch snack!

(c) -- seriuosly

[KingPin27]

I hereby copyright the idea of putting chocolate pieces into a cookie -- pizza fillings inside pastry dough available for microwave or oven bake -- and the idea of diet sodas.
let's see how this goes over

Re:(c) -- seriuosly

[Anonymous Coward]

Bland, trite, and redundant. Wouldn't you feel more at home on YouTube or Digg? Seriously.

Re:(c) -- seriuosly

[fortyonejb]

Actually, what you are proposing is more appropriately a patent. Which, assuming the current culture of the USPTO, is pretty much a 50/50 shot that you could get it. scary huh.

Re:(c) -- seriuosly

[selven]

I hereby copyright copyrighting. Take that, RIAA!

Surprising

[imkonen]

It sounds a little silly, but how different is it from other copyrights? I think most people would agree that culinary arts are as as much an exercise in creativity as visual or audio art. A particular combination of available flavors creates whole greater than the sum. Certainly copyrighting a recipe doesn't seem any different to me than a piece of software code. I guess the weak part in Malaysia's claim is that they seem to be trying to retroactively pull public domain works (recipes that have been around for generations) back into the copyrighted realm, but even that is nothing new. If they can get back the rights to their ethnic food, it seems like Beethoven's descendants should be able to continue collecting royalties on his works.

Re:Surprising

[eldepeche]

Recipes (that is, listing of ingredients by proportion) are not copyrightable, at least in the USA. This has nothing to do with copyright. You don't understand what you're talking about.

Re:Surprising

[cpt kangarooski]

It sounds a little silly, but how different is it from other copyrights?

Copyrights cover creative works; it's patents that cover useful arts. Food is rendered uncopyrightable due to utility. Methods of preparing food, i.e. recipes, are uncopyrightable as well. While inventive chefs could seek patents, and some do, it seems to be fairly uncommon, and the requirement of novelty would make it useless here anyway.

What this really sounds like to me is a designation of origin issue, which is somewhat like a trademark. Personally, I'm not a big fan of them. Champagne, to me at least, is a product which can be made in many different places around the world. I don't mind putting a national or regional appellation on it (French champagne, Australian champagne) if it is applied equally to everyone, but I don't like the idea that it can only be called champagne at all if it is from a specific part of France, regardless of how similar or even identical it might be with the same product made elsewhere. This, IMO, doesn't inform customers, but misleads them, and doesn't aid the market, but hinders it (by implicitly discouraging competition by outside manufacturers).

Re:Surprising

[Artifakt]

Why just musicians descendants? Let's extend it a little.

      I am of predominantly English and Scottish extraction, and have traced my descent from several of the most prominent inventors of the 17th through 19th centuries. If we could only make this scheme universal, For just one, I am probably close enough to both Fulton and Babbage to be able to collect royalties on some of the biggest developments in both power generation and computation in human history. There are probably a thousand people living who are closer to some such persons, but I would definitely fall in the range where my tiny fractional share of a mere 0.3 to 0.5% royalty for use on some of my ancestor's basic ideas would literally mean I could quit working, kick back, and clip certificates to the tune of 10 million dollars a year or so.
        Making money from Beethoven or even Cola bases soft drinks would be trivial for most heirs compared to what perpetual rights to certain basic inventions assigned proportionately in the absence of a contraindicating will would be worth once the world's legal systems simply adopted this rule universally.
      I'm also distantly related to Wittgenstein - how do I make money off of that?

Re:Surprising

[ubercam]

Copying a piece of code or a program is trivially easy, and your ability to create code has nothing to do with your ability to use the copied item.

Following a recipe to make food depends entirely on your ability to cook.

With the code, you already have the finished product (or very close to it, might need compiling, etc), whereas with the recipe, you simply have a list of instructions on how to get to the finished product, which may or may not turn out depending on your culinary abilities and/or experience.

Re:Surprising

[Anonymous Coward]

It's kind of obvious it's really you who doesn't understand what your parent is talking about.

Re:Surprising

[vlm]

I'm also distantly related to Wittgenstein - how do I make money off of that?

Lets find some quotes and apply them to daily life, or at least daily life for a slashdotter.

Any internet post of ".jpg or it didn't happen" owes you license fees (note I'm old enough to remember when it was "gif or it didn't happen")

A picture is a fact.

The mentally deranged architect whom designed the building I work in probably owes royalties to Wittgenstein

"A man will be imprisoned in a room with a door that's unlocked and opens inwards; as long as it does not occur to him to pull rather than push."

And I have worked for several bosses whom stole this management aphorism from Wittgenstein.

I don't know why we are here, but I'm pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves.

Re:Surprising

[gilgongo]

Artist? Writer? Invented something? Getting paid more for it that you'll ever be able to spend in your lifetime? Make sure your descendants get the cut that their accident of birth so rightly grants them!

It's the news rights aristocracy!.

Re:Surprising

[daveime]

whereas with the recipe, you simply have a list of instructions on how to get to the finished product

Remove plastic cover.
Microwave for 90 seconds.

Doesn't take *that* much culinary skill, does it ?

Re:Surprising

[ubercam]

I'm talking recipes, you know like this, a recipe for a quail dish with a raspberry sauce.

What you suggested is hardly a recipe. Well, maybe for some people it is, but I'm not part of that unfortunate crowd.

Re:Surprising

[selven]

Under that logic, Microsoft Windows would be uncopyrightable.

Re:Surprising

[cpt kangarooski]

Software has a lot of gaps in its copyrightability, actually.

It's not a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work, which is what food would have to be, so the utility doctrine doesn't apply to it.

But the copyrightable portions of software cannot include ideas, processes, systems, etc. So if Windows has a sorting algorithm in it, the algorithm itself is uncopyrightable; at best only the particular expression of the algorithm can be copyrightable. This wouldn't preclude someone else from using the same algorithm elsewhere, copying it straight out of Windows, provided that they expressed it differently.

Nor can the copyrightable portion of software be dictated from functional concerns. Copyrightable works must be creative, and that means that creative choices must have been made in determining the particular expression at issue. If, in order to run on an x86 IBM-compatible computer, some parts of Windows _have_ to be written a particular way, then they're not copyrightable.

Nor can the copyrightable portion of software include material where there is only one way, or only a small number of ways to express a particular idea. That's due the merger doctrine, since if a copyright would in effect confer control over uncopyrightable ideas (since there's so few ways to express it), it cannot be valid.

And I could go on.

But really, copyrights and functionality aren't meant to go together very well, and in the case of software, which straddles the line between expression and machine, this tends to mean that a big program like Windows is actually riddled with holes in its copyright protection.

Re:Surprising

[zotz]

"Copyrights cover creative works; it's patents that cover useful arts. Food is rendered uncopyrightable due to utility."

Fine. But really, is this anything but a "because we say so" argument?

drew

Re:Surprising

[gmuslera]

Maybe he tries to point that other things should not be copyrightable neither. How much different is that from i.e. pharmaceutic recipes? Probably there are a lot of areas that have copyrights over things that are in essence pretty similar to cooking recipes.

not alone trying trademark traditional food

[Anonymous Coward]

few years back companies in Slovenia tried to trademark ajvar
what is next, a trademark for ham?

Re:not alone trying trademark traditional food

[Anonymous Coward]

"Ham" is too easy to pronounce.

Durian...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what that smells like, it smells like a big old durian fruit...

we already copywritten recipes

[nimbius]

in america, and the recipe copyrights as is evidenced by kernel sanders and his infamous C&D orders against imitators are enforced. look in the drinks book at any applebees bar, youll see copyrights. bonefish copyrights all their sauce recipes and mcdonalds copyrights their secret sauce recipe.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[PPH]

and the recipe copyrights as is evidenced by kernel sanders

Dude. You've been spending too much time hacking your Linux box. But then, who hasn't? Excuse me while I recompile my colonel.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[hondo77]

No, they don't. The secret recipes of McDonalds and KFC are trade secrets.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[james.m.henderson]

I'm know that the KFC recipe and big mac Secret sauce a href="http://www.walletpop.com/specials/closely-guarded-trade-secrets?icid=200100397x1210050216x1200602328#" are trade secrets, not copyrights or patents. This technique means that they will never have their patents or copyrights expire on their items (haha, like copyrights really expire anymore...). They would also of course trademark the _name_ of these items. So it is not exactly that the recipes are copyrighted, just that they are secret and you aren't allowed to call something else by the same or similar name.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[james.m.henderson]

I'm know that the KFC recipe http://www.newsday.com/business/coca-cola-and-kfc-s-secret-formulas-are-safe-for-now-1.886055 and big mac Secret sauce http://www.walletpop.com/specials/closely-guarded-trade-secrets?icid=200100397x1210050216x1200602328# are trade secrets, not copyrights or patents. This technique means that they will never have their patents or copyrights expire on their items (haha, like copyrights really expire anymore...). They would also of course trademark the _name_ of these items. So it is not exactly that the recipes are copyrighted, just that they are secret and you aren't allowed to call something else by the same or similar name.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[eldepeche]

They don't copyright their recipes, AFAIK, they keep them secret. I used to own a cookbook that taught how to make a taste-alike version of the Colonel's Original Recipe (flour, salt, white and black pepper and MSG) and Big Mac sauce; the author was not sued for copyright infringement. There are trademarks, which prevent you from selling something called a Big Mac, but right now Carl's Jr. (Hardee's) is selling a sandwich that they advertise as being a bigger Big Mac. Legal threats? Not so much.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[jggimi]

I cannot add mod points, so I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[fluffy99]

Another big reason for calling them a trade secret is so they don't have to show the public all the unpronounceable chemical names and crap in the food. They do have to show the FDA though, who is pretty much bought and sold by big pharma and food anyway.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[DaveV1.0]

To add to what others have said, The Kentucky Fried Chicken C&Ds were not about recipes. They were about the naming and look of the restaurants. KFC claimed that certain restaurants were trying to lure in customers by appearing to be a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant by using similar color schemes and names such ask Kennedy Fried Chicken and Kantacky Fried Chicken.

It was a trademark claim, not a copyright claim.

You don't seem to know the difference between trade secrets, trademarks, copyrights, and probably patents.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[LaraineMae]

I strongly suggest to NOT eat at any KFC in Malaysia. I did and I don't think it was chicken. And it was 20 times worse than KFC in the USA!

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[GlennC]

I thought everyone already knew that the "special sauce" in a Big Mac is thousand-island dressing.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[HornWumpus]

20 times worse?

That is just not possible.

Kentucky Fried Rat isn't even food.

BTW the 'Secret recipe' was originally Seven Seas Italian dressing mix powdered in a blender then added to the breading.

Sanders had to reverse engineer the dressing mix when he franchised KFR.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[mishehu]

Actually, Bender already found out what the Colonel's Secret Recipe is... chicken, grease, salt.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[izomiac]

A quick Google search reveals that isn't the case. Skimming over the list of ingredients doesn't reveal any surprises, nor does it seem to be abridged since MSG and trans-fats are in there. Surely you realize that fast food isn't inherently different than any other kind of food... It may be fairly processed, but KFC does serve chicken and McDonalds does serve beef. No major differences from what you'd find in a supermarket, albeit most people wouldn't cook such high fat/Calorie food very often.

If you're worried about "unpronounceable chemicals" I'd recommend a course in organic chemistry and biochemistry. No claims that fast food is healthy, but at least it becomes "the devil you know". After all, you wouldn't want to freak out about dihydrogen monoxide in your food, would you?

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[fluffy99]

McDonalds claims their burgers are made with 100% Beef Products, which is not the same things as only contains 100% beef products. FDA considers that term to include a whole list of cow parts that you won't find in the supermarket. They pressure wash the remains off the bones and add that gruel to the low grade ground cowparts that comprise low grade beef (that's why it looks so grey). Intact chicken is usually okay, but stuff like mcnuggets that use "processed" chicken isn't exactly all white meat.

Are aware that the FDA guidelines allow manufacturers to consider some ingredients as incidental (usually under a certain percentage or considered inert) and not include them in the labeling? Common ingredients would be things like the solvent for some of the flavoring and spices. For a grosser example, consider that up to a certain ppm of rat turds are allowed in the food, but not required to be listed on the label. MSG can be in the food but not be apparent on the label, as it can be included in other ingredients (soy sauces for example) or be described under one of several other chemical names?

I really wish the FDA would include MSG in their list allergens, which would force the manufacturers to be more open about the MSG content of their products. FDA won't because its not a potentially life-threatening sensitivity, but a significant amount of the population has ill effects from large doses (usually headaches).

I have had plenty of chem classes, and can pronounce the names quite well. The phrase "unpronounceable chemicals" is just a phrase - don't take it literally. I take exception that I need to use google to determine what those chemicals are, why they might be used, and what health risks they entail.

Technically, they shouldn't list dihydrogen monoxide as the FDA guidelines require plain language names where possible. For example sugar instead of sucrose, but you see HFCS listed instead of sugar quite often.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/FoodLabelingNutrition/FoodLabelingGuide/ucm064880.htm

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[izomiac]

I agree that MSG should be listed, but things like rat turds and low grade beef, while disgusting at an emotional level, are not really worrisome. Beef grade affects taste more than anything, and fast food obviously tastes decent given its popularity. Rat turds are fairly natural, and probably part of a natural human diet (as would be rats). The latter might cause illness if they don't cook the beef well enough, but it's not going to do much to a person long-term. We actually get eat pound or two of chopped insect parts mixed with our vegetables every year. It's healthy since insects are also a natural part of our diet (beyond the handful of spiders we unwittingly eat in our sleep).

I'm split on whether ingredient lists should be more inclusive or not. Realistically, if everything was listed if it could be detected then ingredient lists would be books. OTOH, a person needs to know what they're ordering (from a capitalist/free market perspective). In practical terms, almost nobody is going to care about the vast majority of ingredients, and several are in such low amounts as to be ignorable. Nothing's a poison and everything's a poison after all. I suppose a decent compromise is to list everything that's detected in a chemical analysis if it has a known biological effect at that concentration. Trivia: did you that McDonald's french fries contain acrylamide? It's not an ingredient but is produced in situ during preparation. People tend to forget that cooking is a chemical reaction, and the ingredients list is simply the starting point.

As for using Google, I think you can ask for the ingredients list at the restaurants. Realistically, there's too much information to keep on top of for most things, even common stuff like sucrose or fructose. I doubt that all the effects of those two compounds are even known (empirically we know that sucrose is mostly harmless, whereas HFCS is sorta bad if you eat a lot over a long time).

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[_avs_007]

Actually they did a piece on MSG on the Food Detective a while ago... The sensitivity to MSG is a myth. They even did a test at a restaurant, and only served half the people MSG. At the end, they asked who thinks they had MSG, and what symptoms they had, etc... All the people that raised their hands, and described their headaches and such, actually did not even consume any MSG.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[LaraineMae]

Well, when you travel halfway round the world you just want to try it...

Gee, all this time I thought it was just salt and pepper.

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[fluffy99]

No its not a myth. Citing a small sample test performed by Food Detective who is hardly an authoritative or unbiased source, is quite laughable. I doubt you even realized that study was funded by an MSG trade association. I'll bet you watch Fox news or CNN and believe all their crap too, eh?

The studies sponsored by the FDA show that MSG is generally regarded as safe, but they do cite that many people have sensitivity to high portions of MSG. For the summary of FDA recommendation as put out in 1995, please see http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/msg.html. For the lazy people, here is a key passage - "Among the report's key findings: An unknown percentage of the population may react to MSG and develop MSG symptom complex, a condition characterized by one or more of the following symptoms:"

If you're not too lazy, this Mayo clinic article sums it pretty well.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/monosodium-glutamate/AN01251

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[MichaelSmith]

No, they don't. The secret recipes of McDonalds and KFC are trade secrets.

How about the secret recipes of McCurry?

Re:we already copywritten recipes

[Anonymous Coward]

Recompile mine too, he's been a real jerk about letting me be on Slashdot.

Imma chargin' Malaysia!

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is in charge of Malaysia?

Imma chargin' Malaysia!!!

Re:No copyright for recipes in Western world

[IcyNeko]

Now getting Mugatu to summon Zoolander...

Malaysia at it again

[Anonymous Coward]

First those silly and outdated child labor laws, now this.

Yes, but...

[Drunken Buddhist]

Yes, but won't you just be hungry again in an hour if you eat one?

Re:Yes, but...

[sopssa]

Thats the case with hamburgers and hot dogs and other traditional american food too.

Re:Yes, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but won't you just be hungry again in an hour if you eat one?

Seeing as how the list of eating lead poisoned food symptoms includes:

Effects include abdominal pain, joint pain,[1] and chest pain. Cognitive problems such as memory loss and difficulty concentrating can also result,[5] as can behavioural changes, such as problems with sleep,[5] hyperactivity, irritability, clumsiness,[17] inability to concentrate, aggressiveness, or mood swings. Poisoning can cause neuropathy,[5] such as weakness, tremors, twitches, spasms, or cramps.

You'll be hungry regardless of how much food you eat :)

Re:Yes, but...

[vlm]

No, the added melamine is very filling

Re:Yes, but...

[rubi]

Except TRUE asian food is relatively less fatty and salty than hambuguers and hot-dogs.

Trademark the Hamburger

[CruddyBuddy]

1: Trademark hamburger (cheeseburger too! Fries while I'm at it.)
2: License to McDonald's
3: Profit!

Re:Trademark the Hamburger

[richdun]

But see, McDonald's is already 10 steps ahead of you there - when franchisees complained about the cost of a "double cheeseburger" ("universally" recognized as a sandwich with 2 hamburger patties and 2 slices of cheese) then on the Dollar Menu, they created a "new" sandwich with 2 patties, 1 slice of cheese and called it the "McDouble," moving the "double cheeseburger" up to something like $1.29 and putting the "McDouble" on the Dollar Menu.

And, speaking of Malaysia, they already go after anyone with "Mc" in the name - so no trademarking "McSandwich" or "McBreadWithMeat" or "McDoubleMcMeatProductWithMcCheeseProduct."

Re:Trademark the Hamburger

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll get in a fight with the Hamburgers (the people who live in Hamburg, for clarity).

Re:Trademark the Hamburger

[jonbryce]

1. Hamburg gets a PDO on Hamburger
2. Attempts to licence to McDonalds
3. McDonalds starts calling them Beefburgers
4. No profit

Re:Trademark the Hamburger

[oldhack]

What I found truly popular in the disparate countries I visited is fried chicken. Don't care how poor or rich the country, if they are a target market for KFC, you'd see groups of fat people gorging on buckets of them.

Fried Chicken©!!!

The devastating 1-2 combo with: Potato Chip©.

We are now THE global IP superpower. Take that all you fat foreign bastards, I mean, our valued customers!

Re:Trademark the Hamburger

[MichaelSmith]

And, speaking of Malaysia, they already go after anyone with "Mc" in the name - so no trademarking "McSandwich" or "McBreadWithMeat" or "McDoubleMcMeatProductWithMcCheeseProduct."

You missed the news.

Diluted Meaning

[Nethemas the Great]

The more copyrights, patents, trademarks and the like are applied to all aspects of existence the less people will pay attention to them. People will largely treat them as meaningless and tread all over them even in areas generally considered legitimate.

Re:Diluted Meaning

[eldepeche]

This is not a copyright or patent issue, nor is it strictly a trademark issue either. It is the seldom-referenced fourth category of "intellectual property," geographical indicators. It, like trademark, is rooted in the principle that prevents you from opening up a burger shop with big golden arches out front. Companies have a right to enforce their brand, and geographical regions have a right to regulate the quality and authenticity of any product bearing a claim of origin in that region. This is the most defensible type of intellectual property. (That said, I know nothing about the merits of this particular case.)

Re:Diluted Meaning

[cpt kangarooski]

Companies have a right to enforce their brand, and geographical regions have a right to regulate the quality and authenticity of any product bearing a claim of origin in that region. This is the most defensible type of intellectual property.

Why?

Certainly, I have no problem with laws that avoid confusion or deception of customers as to products that claim to be from a particular place. Wine made in France shouldn't be labeled as American wine, nor vice versa. But if customers understand a particular term to refer to a product itself, rather than to a claim of origin, then there's no confusion or deception to protect against. Thus, because champagne is a sort of wine, it is perfectly fine to have French champagne as well as American champagne. (Or if even that wouldn't suffice, as would be the case with american cheese made in Canada, for example, then a 'Made in' or 'Product of' label might be required for clarity)

It would actually harm consumers and the market if the latter were not allowed to be so labeled. People who wanted the product called champagne, but who were not picky about where it came from, who would just look for the word 'champagne' on the label, just like someone might look for 'soda' or 'coffee,' would wind up paying monopoly prices since wines made outside of a specific part of France couldn't bear a thoroughly generic label that described them aptly.

As with trademarks, the lesson to those who would claim rights is that too much success can lead to genericide. If the French don't want people using the generic name for these wines, then let the French come up with a brand new name, just for them to use. Passing silly laws to combat the common usage of certain terms by the public is both pointless and mean.

Re:Diluted Meaning

[eldepeche]

The product called Champagne comes from Champagne, just as the product Bordeaux comes from Bordeaux. The product sparkling white wine can be made anywhere, as can the product Cabernet Sauvignon. This genericization is disliked by champagnoises as well as Californian and other American producers of sparking white wine, because what distinguishes Champagne is its origin. Just because lots of people recognize a double-decker burger with lettuce, onions, cheese, pickles and a weird pinkish-orangish sauce as a Big Mac, doesn't mean that anyone should be able to sell a Big Mac.

Re:Diluted Meaning

[cpt kangarooski]

The product sparkling white wine is synonymous with champagne for most people. Feel free to try this out by giving random people a cup of such wine from any old place and asking them to tell you what they call it. Since consumer expectations are what controls, that's matters. Vintners can like it or lump it.

Just because lots of people recognize a double-decker burger with lettuce, onions, cheese, pickles and a weird pinkish-orangish sauce as a Big Mac, doesn't mean that anyone should be able to sell a Big Mac.

Actually, that is exactly what it means.

If people generally call all such burgers Big Macs, then the term has become generic, and anyone can sell their burgers of that type as Big Macs.

This isn't new: Escalator, elevator, shredded wheat, kerosene, popsicle, cellophane, trampoline, etc. all were trademarks once upon a time, indicating that goods with those marked came from particular manufacturers. But once the public decided that those were generic names for products regardless of manufacturer, that's what they became. And that's fine, there's nothing wrong with this. It is annoying for the manufacturers who lost their marks through popularity, but who cares about that?

Champagne is champagne is champagne. It doesn't matter where it is from. If you want to indicate where it is from, and you want to make sure that people cannot make claims about the geographic origin that would deceive the public, then put a label on the bottle saying something to the effect of 'Made in the Champagne area of France.' If you just say champagne, no one is going to know where it is from, and the fault is yours for not being sufficiently clear.

Re:Diluted Meaning

[eldepeche]

I guess the question is where to draw the line in the law, since people will call things whatever they want. In history, brands have become genericized because the name became synonymous with the product due to lack of a descriptive name. Kleenex is still legally protected as a trademark because it is a brand of facial tissues. Escalators seem to have lost trademark status because they weren't called moving staircases.

Most people in the southern US refer to sweetened carbonated beverages as "coke." Would you be in favor of the legal genericide of that particular trademark?

I personally think that trademarks are important for consumer protection, so that the standard of that product can be maintained and assured. Vintners in Champagne have been vigilant over the last few hundred years that products sold as Champagne be of a consistent quality. Some of this can be chalked up to snootiness on the part of the makers of the wine, but if you have no influence over the quality, would you want another producer to be able to sell a product with a brand you have maintained for your entire life?

Incidentally, I never realized how wonderful Parmigiano was until I tried it for reals. I grew up thinking Parmesan was ho-hum because Kraft can sell their shitty dairy product and lead people to believe that's what cheese is.

Re:Diluted Meaning

[cpt kangarooski]

In history, brands have become genericized because the name became synonymous with the product due to lack of a descriptive name.

No, not at all. Xerox is constantly on the verge of losing their mark for photocopiers, and that's an existing generic name. They spend a lot of money and do a lot of work to try to keep their mark alive, and if actually challenged, they could still lose it. Ditto Kleenex (paper tissues) and for quite some time Sanka (decaffeinated coffee). Google has written the standard nasty letters to dictionaries, because they're afraid of the verb 'google,' meaning 'search on the Internet.'

It's merely good practice to add the generic name for the product alongside the brand name so as to reduce the chances that customers will think that the brand name is the name for the actual good. Hence 'Levi's blue jeans.' It's not actually necessary, however, which is why you don't see 'iPod personal media players,' just 'iPods.'

Most people in the southern US refer to sweetened carbonated beverages as "coke." Would you be in favor of the legal genericide of that particular trademark?

In the South? Where I happen to originally be from, and where I too have picked up this habit? Yes. Coke is as generic a term in that area as 'soda,' or as 'pop' is in wherever the hell people say such a silly thing. However, the COCA-COLA mark would remain alive.

I personally think that trademarks are important for consumer protection, so that the standard of that product can be maintained and assured.

I agree. However, that is no excuse to preserve a trademark when it has become generic, and the customers no longer expect all products using the generic name to be of the same standard. I expect all Heinz ketchup to be of the same quality. I don't expect all ketchup to be of the same quality regardless of source, however.

Vintners in Champagne have been vigilant over the last few hundred years that products sold as Champagne be of a consistent quality.

That's great. Then they should have a regional mark along the lines of 'Made in Champagne, France' or a certification mark like 'CIVC Approved' or something. And of course each vintner can have their own mark and label.

But that doesn't change what the public believes champagne is -- sparkling wine -- not sparkling wine that is from one particular place, but not another, even if the two are basically indistinguishable.

but if you have no influence over the quality, would you want another producer to be able to sell a product with a brand you have maintained for your entire life?

It isn't really a brand. It's a generic name. That's the problem. It can only be a brand if people perceive it as one. For most geographically named food items, people don't. Swiss cheese is dry cheese with holes in it, but it needn't be cheese that is actually from Switzerland. No one goes to the supermarket or the deli and asks for the dry, holey cheese. They ask for Swiss. If it happens to be from Vermont, or Wisconsin, that's fine. I doubt many people care all that much.

I mean, I doubt that you get together with your friends and start making airline reservations if someone suggests going out for ethnic food on the basis that Chinese food can only be had in China, or Italian food can only be had it Italy.

I grew up thinking Parmesan was ho-hum because Kraft can sell their shitty dairy product and lead people to believe that's what cheese is.

See, that's where trademarks are useful. Not in protecting a mark on Parmesan cheese, as being only that made in Parma, that's silly. But in protecting the Kraft mark so that you know to avoid them because they're crappy. I'll bet if you looked around you could find a domestic Parmesan that was just as good as the imported. If the cheeses from different sources can turn out to be indistinguishable to the customer, why should the first one get to use the generic name, and the second one get punished merely due to an accident of geography or history?

trademark

[Anonymous Coward]

can one trademark trademarking? Cause that is the only way this can get any more dumb.

Re:trademark

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know... that might just be the only way to stop it...

Re:trademark

[jonbryce]

No, you would patent trademarking.

We should do this with American foods

[Anonymous Coward]

The copyrights on French fries, hot dogs, and pizza alone should be able to pay for universal health care.

Re:We should do this with American foods

[Anonymous Coward]

Aren't those French, German and Italian, respectively?

Re:We should do this with American foods

[bitemykarma]

There aren't many dishes invented in America unless you include Mexico. Certainly none of the ones that you list are American.

Re:We should do this with American foods

[sabs]

Actually no
French Fries are actually Belgium.
And Pizza as you know it, is actually American.

Re:We should do this with American foods

[geminidomino]

What we call "pizza" certainly is, as Sabs also pointed out.

The Italian ancestor of it is a far different animal.

window of opportunity closed

[Anonymous Coward]

very long ago

You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

You could make hummous. You just couldn't call it "hummous".

The concept is foreign to the US, but to much older areas, culturally, it's very important. You can't make "Delft" pottery except in Delft. You can't make "champaign" except in the Champaign region of France.

And cheeses, don't get me started.

Of course, that wouldn't apply in the US which doesn't recognize this (since they're ancient names and words, which thus would not be copyrightable or trademarkable, IANAL YMMV) but the US's not the point here.

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[Vinegar Joe]

You can't make "Delft" pottery except in Delft.

Delft pottery is a Dutch knockoff of Chinese pottery. Maybe the Chinese should sue?

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[Anonymous Coward]

In all honesty, though, Lebanon has a point about falafels. The stuff they sell from frozen food aisles around here in Finland as falafels is quite atrocious. If I were a Lebanese official afraid of my country's reputation, that would surely be my first thing to worry about.

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[Avalain]

Well, if the TFA is correct and they are trying to trademark hummus, you COULD call it "hummous". Or perhaps you could call it hamos, houmous, hommos, hommus, hummos, or humus.

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[schon]

You could make hummous. You just couldn't call it "hummous".

The concept is foreign to the US, but to much older areas, culturally, it's very important. You can't make "Delft" pottery except in Delft. You can't make "champaign" except in the Champaign region of France.

Please point me to the state, city or region in the middle east called "Hummous." I couldn't find it in Google Maps.

Then please point me to the city or region in Malaysia called "Nasi Lemak". I couldn't find that in Google Maps either.

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[eldepeche]

The US is a member of the UN, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and a signatory to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, so, this does apply in the US. The particular terms may be different (e.g., Parmesan is permitted in the US, but within Europe the term "Italian hard cheese" is used to refer to cheese made in the style of, but not within the borders of, the Parmigiano-Reggiano region), but the protection is required of all signatory members.

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[Artifakt]

The US is the point here, as in:
Right now, US industries have pushed for some ultra restrictive laws such as the DMCA which cut our economic growth rate and give nations that ignore them a competitive advantage. Since the US won't recognise using a straight forward place name or item name that is in common use as a trademarkable, if Europe or South East Asia accept this, the US gets a more favorable balance of trade out of the situation. As a US citizen, I certainly appreciate the whole rest of the world saddling themselves with whatever incredibly boneheaded regulations the Indonesian government wants them to adopt, just so my nation isn't dumb enough to lead the jump off this particular bridge for once.

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[bobschneider8]

You can't make "champaign" except in the Champaign region of France.

No, you can't make "champaign" except near the University of Illinois. You can't make "champagne" except in the Champagne region of France.

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[St.Creed]

You can't make "Delft" pottery except in Delft.

Delft pottery is a Dutch knockoff of Chinese pottery. Maybe the Chinese should sue?

And then call it what? Beijing pottery? Good luck with that :)

Although the Chinese could just ploink down a pottery-factory in Delft and create as much Delft pottery as they like. However the market is very small so I've no doubt that Delft pottery has little to fear from the Chinese.

Re:You just couldn't call it "hummous".

[Vinegar Joe]

And then call it what? Beijing pottery?

We already have a word for it: "chinaware"

Prime Rib

[Anonymous Coward]

I am "steaking" a claim on Prime Rib, in the name of the United States of America! We will not give up this wonderful, artery-clogging delicacy!

Re:Prime Rib

[Convector]

It's only Prime Rib if it comes from Prime beef. Otherwise, it's just a standing rib roast (which itself is a noble thing). Chances are, you're not buying Prime at the supermarket.

Re:Prime Rib

[Anonymous Coward]

A Super Market in California had a ACME Choice Meats designation that the USDA made them change, because the meats were not actually "Choice" it was just a marketing thing. They changed it to Rancher's Reserve.

There are certain words for describing specific foods that are protected by law.
Amusingly the US has a ton of these, and yet does not recognize anyone elses.

Re:Prime Rib

[cetialphav]

What you say is true, but the recent economic decline has meant that prime beef is showing up in unexpected places (like Costco) at cheap prices (like $9.99 per pound). See this article in the Wall Street Journal. It is still unlikely to have prime beef sold at your local supermarket, but if you keep a good lookout you might find some surprises right now.

Re:Prime Rib

[russotto]

It's only Prime Rib if it comes from Prime beef. Otherwise, it's just a standing rib roast (which itself is a noble thing). Chances are, you're not buying Prime at the supermarket.

A prime rib is a prime rib regardless of whether it comes from USDA Prime beef; it's an exception.

Re:Prime Rib

[value_added]

A prime rib is a prime rib regardless of whether it comes from USDA Prime beef; it's an exception.

And "USDA Prime" is an indication of quality?

The food that gets distributed to schools, prisons and food banks is labelled similarly. If there's value to the USDA branding, it's that the quality of what you're getting is one step above most commercial brands of dog food.

Re:Prime Rib

[treeves]

I bought some USDA Prime sirloin steaks at Costco a couple of weeks ago. Mmm, were they good.

Re:Prime Rib

[russotto]

The food that gets distributed to schools, prisons and food banks is labelled similarly.

I don't know where you were incarcerated, but I've never seen a USDA marking on such food. I did see the markings on some of the boxes at the University of Maryland. Definitely not USDA Prime... rather "Grade D" and "For institutional use". (Yes, I know snopes denies the existence of "Grade D" meat. I know what I saw. The grading was not necessarily a USDA grading).

The EU kind of has something like this already...

[Anonymous Coward]

I know that in the EU and several of its member countries, there is something similar - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_Geographical_Status .

Basically, it means that someone can't market a product as being, say, traditional Aged Sherry Vinegar (Vinegar de Juarez), unless it comes from the traditional sherry producing areas.

I like it. It helps maintain quality, authentic products and makes it easy to spot the fake knockoffs.

Well, it appears it was English beforehand...

[Thundarr Trollgrim]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8180791.stm We just decided we didn't like it any more :P

Re:Well, it appears it was English beforehand...

[jonbryce]

Well the haggis animal very definitely lives on the Scottish mountains. That is just some cheap synthetic knock off.

NOT Copyright...

[Jahava]

As the linked article mentions, the cited article only mentions "copyright" in the headline. Nowhere in the actual article does it mention that Malaysia is making any copyright claims (or with which copyright entity).

Rather, the article details Malaysia's claim that the food originated from Malaysia, not that it's owned by Malaysia. I read it as just a semantic claim.

It's the equivalent to Germany asserting that the hot dog is German.

then there'll be free software analogies

[H4x0r Jim Duggan]

    When people have to campaign for their freedom to share and change recipes, they can simply reverse Stallman's recipe example:

  But these freedoms should not be strange to you. At least, not if you cook, because people who cook enjoy the same four freedoms in using recipes.

The freedom to cook the recipe when you want. Thatâ(TM)s freedom zero. The freedom to study the ingredients and how itâ(TM)s done, and then change it. Thatâ(TM)s freedom one. Cooks frequently change recipes. And then the freedom to copy it and hand copies to your friends. Thatâ(TM)s freedom two. And then, freedom three is less frequently exercised because itâ(TM)s more work, but if you cook your version of the recipes for a dinner with your friends, and a friend says "that was great, can I have the recipe?" you can write down your version of the recipe and make a copy for your friend.

I own the Copyright to Malaysian....

[codeonezero]

History, Culture, Government, Land, and anything else that I may or may not have thought of related to Malaysia. Please pay me.

The story behind it

[Amitz Sekali]

Indonesia and Malaysia is currently in a...uh.. copyright war. For a few months, there are some cultural stuff (like dance, show, food) that each claims to origin from themselves. I believe it was started by a Malaysia tourism advertisement that claims certain dance to origin from Malaysia.

Not a new phenominon

[tsotha]

I don't know how you could blame them. In 1997 a US company called RiceTek patented a strain of Rice they called Basmati, a name the Indians have been using for centuries. All kinds of companies take out defensive patents, where they never intend to collect money from other people, but they don't want to pay for obvious ideas either. There's no reason the same thing wouldn't happen in the copyright arena. From here:

According to Dr Vandana Shiva, director of a Delhi-based research foundation which monitors issues involving patents and biopiracy, the main aim for obtaining the patent by RiceTec Inc. is to fool the consumers in believing there is no difference between spurious Basmati and real Basmati. Moreover, she claims the "theft involved in the Basmati patent is, therefore, threefold: a theft of collective intellectual and biodiversity heritage on Indian farmers, a theft from Indian traders and exporters whose markets are being stolen by RiceTec Inc., and finally a deception of consumers since RiceTec is using a stolen name Basmati for rice which are derived from Indian rice but not grown in India, and hence are not the same quality."

It doesn't seem odd the Malaysians would seek to prevent similar problems. The situation isn't exactly the same, since this is a copyright and RiceTek took out a patent, but I think the business objective is the same.

Re:Not a new phenominon

[Anonymous Coward]

And a US company tried to trademark rooibos tea (Afrikaans term meaning "red bush" which has been used in South Africa for centuries).

But they're not talking about products here, just recipes. It's like saying you can't call it ratatouille unless it's made in France.

Regarding TFS

[Anonymous Coward]

Techdirt is reporting that Malaysia seems to be jumping on the copyright/trademark bandwagon and attempting to protect the "ownership" of certain ethnic foods. Of course, this may just be a massive PR push in an attempt to grab some eyeballs.

Now, I've heard of some weird foreign foods, but is that some kind of Malaysian delicacy?

Semi-generics in US law

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

Not that we in the US honor Europe's protected designations of origins anyway.

Actually, the USA partially does so; the EU's gripe is that the USA doesn't honor them enough. But basically, in the USA:

1. You can't generally label a wine, cheese or other such product with a geographic designation that it's not entitled to. You can't take Sonoma Sauvignon Blanc and label it Sancerre. (Or for that matter, you can't take Central Valley Chardonnay and call it Napa Valley.)
2. However, there are certain names that the USA considers semi-generic, and that are qualified exceptions to the general rule. You can take Sonoma sparkling wine and label it "Californian champagne" for sale in the USA, or fortify some Central Valley red wine and call it Californian port wine. You have to have the geographic descriptor along with the semi-generic name; you can't label your American sparkling wine simply as "Champagne," and you sure as hell can't call your cheap fortified swill an Oporto.

Sparkling wine; grana cheese.

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

The problem with Parmesan and Champagne is there's not a good generic term for foodstuffs of that type not from that origin, whereas if you could get decent maple syrup outside of Vermont you could call it "maple syrup" and people would actually understand what it is.

There's a perfectly decent generic term for sparkling wine. Talking about grana cheese generically is considerably more difficult, though, at least if you want people to understand you.

Re:Sparkling wine; grana cheese.

[BluBrick]

There's a perfectly decent generic term for sparkling wine.

There's a perfectly decent generic term for hard cheese.

Style

[istartedi]

What's wrong with "Parmesan-style", "Champagne-style", etc.

You could require that the "style" be in the same size and font as the other part of the name on the packaging. You could also require that the actual origin be near the name: Parmesan-style cheese from Champagne.

Re:Style

[srmalloy]

What's wrong with "Parmesan-style", "Champagne-style", etc.

That's what "methode Champignoise" has been used for; it's just a high-falutin' way of saying "by the Champagne method", denoting a sparkling wine that has been produced identically to Champagne except for the origin of the grapes, but somehow the use of a foreign language to describe it makes the resultant wine more highbrow than the run-of-the-mill Chateauneuf du Plonque.

Oh, damn, I take it back.

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

It turns out now there's a Grana Padano protected designation, so you can't call that kind of cheese grana anymore.

Public Domain

[frovingslosh]

Although forces of evil like Disney would like to have it otherwise, copyrights are still for a limited period of time. In the U.S. this is even spelled out in our Constitution, with the copyrighted material them passing into Public Domain. This article is talking about traditional foods, not some newfangled "Invention" (which might be covered by shorter lasting patents than longer lasting copyright). So even if the concept of copyright on food were valid (and I believe it is bogus), wouldn't these foods have passed into Public Domain long ago?

Alternately, can a claim of copyright be made by a country? Wouldn't a copyright claim have to be made by an author? Clearly the government of these countries are not the authors of these foods, so they have no copyright claim on them. It is more reasonable to assume that the real author wanted their intellectual property to pass into public domain than to fall into the hands of politicians.

Not copyright

[eldepeche]

Uh, this has nothing to do with copyright. The TRIPS agreement formally established geographical indicators as protected intellectual property about 15 years ago. It's similar to a trademark, as it is an assurance of quality and consistency of product. As others above pointed out, the same protection exists for Champagne, Cognac, Parmigiano, Basmati, and several hundred others. I can make no assessment of whether this instance is justified or not, but the linked blog post (and most of the responses here) is kneejerk and uninformed.

Re:Not copyright

[Coren22]

What specific Geography would these indicators be based off of? As far as I can tell, there are no geographic regions involved in the name nasi lemak

Re:Not copyright

[eldepeche]

I dunno. It's likely spurious, but my point was summarized pretty well in my title, "Not copyright."

Your own link contradicts you.

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

For better or worse "Champagne" has become a genericized trademark.

Your own link contradicts you. Champagne has never been a trademark; it's a protected designation of origin.

Re:Your own link contradicts you.

[Shakrai]

And that changes my point how, exactly? Go to any restaurant or liquor store in the United States and ask for 'champagne'. Nine out of ten of them will bring a list of sparkling wines, the vast majority of which aren't even French (let alone from 'Champagne')

Re:Your own link contradicts you.

[TheRaven64]

Try it anywhere else in the world, and you will get Champagne. The USA explicitly does not recognise AOC, although that doesn't stop it from pushing its own trademarks on the rest of the world.

Re:Your own link contradicts you.

[Anonymous Coward]

So, go into a KFC and ask for a Coke, and they will give you a Pepsi. It still doesn't make it a Coke though.

This seems logical

[spun]

This system seems to me to adequately protect consumers and producers, while acknowledging the fact that certain designations have become semi-generic. In America, people do not associate Champagne or Parmesan with a particular region, but with a particular taste or style. Champagne is synonymous with sparkling wine, labeling it 'California Champagne' removes any uncertainty as to origins while using a word that consumers are familiar with. While one could call Champagne 'sparkling wine,' what could one even call Parmesan except Parmesan without confusing the consumer even more? Stinky hard Italian style cow's milk cheese?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Well, the French own wine, right?

[John Hasler]

n/t

Re:No copyright for recipes in Western world

[Alain Williams]

There is a great deal of difference between publishing the recipe in a book, where it can be made by people at home, and someone selling something that has not been produced in Malaysia.

The recipe for Stilton Cheese is well known, but you can only call it Stilton if it has been made in the three Counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire. It cannot be made in the village of Stilton that gave it its name since, at the time the EU came up with the definition, it had been forgotten that it had ever been produced there!

I have trademarked all digested food

[xednieht]

So eat all you want, but in the end you'll be paying me.... muahhahahahaha!!! 1 million dollars.

Re:I have trademarked all digested food

[Anonymous Coward]

I prefer to send you back the digested food. Expect a truck in the next few weeks.

That's not quite accurate.

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

You're not generally allowed to mislabel your products in the USA to make consumers believe that they come from some region that they do not, especially if you do so to mislead consumers into paying a higher price. There exist specific exceptions in regional wine names that are recognized as semi-generics with special rules, and some regional product names that are seen as generics ("parmesan"). You can take your Wisconsin cheese and label it "Parmesan," and nobody will go after you in the United States; but if you label your $5/lb Wisconsin cheese as "Parmigiano Reggiano," that's not cool.

Kind of amusing

[PCM2]

I find it interesting that Malaysia would be claiming there should be copyright protection for foods, when there isn't any kind of copyright protection for anything else in that country/region -- not in any real sense.

This isn't a troll -- just try going to any market in Malaysia. You'll find whole tables of knockoff DVDs, knockoff Paul Frank T-shirts, knockoff shoes, knockoff handbags ... the average person sees nothing wrong with it.

I once went to a DVD store in a mall on the island of Penang, off the west coast of Malaysia, probably around 2002. I mean this was a real store with one of those roll-down metal cages that go in front of the plate glass windows when they close shop, inside a real mall with a food court and everything. This store had one small bookcase full of legitimate, imported American DVDs. The entire rest of the store was given over to knockoffs. You could get DVD-5 copies for about $5 and the DVD-9s were about $8. They were well aware what they were doing; they even had DVD players and TVs on hand so you could double-check the video quality of the copies you were buying. I picked up a set of the original Star Wars trilogy on DVD-9, plus a copy of Raiders of the Lost Ark. In passing, I told one of the kids working there (he was wearing a polo shirt with the store's logo on it) that you couldn't buy any of these movies in America (at that time, none of them was available on DVD). He looked at me like I'd just told him I'd never seen rice before.

Mind you, technically it was all illegal. Malaysia actually seemed to have a pretty strong force of "copyright cops" that would do sweeps for pirated DVDs. The problem was that copyright law was one of those laws that was so poorly respected by the average citizen -- basically, everybody living in Malaysia had broken it at least once, and probably did so routinely -- that there was absolutely no respect for enforcement, which in turn leads to corruption. Everybody involved in the knock-off trade seemed to have a contact who would tip them off when a sting was about to happen. I met some Australian tourists who were hoping to go to the DVD store I mentioned, but when they went (on a Wednesday afternoon) it was closed. Apparently they had been warned not to open that day. Similarly, even guys who were hawking their wares on blankets at the night markets would occasionally get calls on their cell phones, then immediately roll up their bundles and walk away while customers were still waving money.

Still, no doubt this effort by the Malaysian government does a couple things:

1. It gets some attention for local cuisine, which isn't as well-known outside the region as (say) Thai food
2. It gives Malaysia brownie points with the Western countries for acting like they really care about intellectual property law

Personally, though, I doubt the average Malaysian cares much more about it than Americans care when we find out our home city is now "the sister city of Vladivostok." Sounds great, but what difference does it make to me?

Re:Kind of amusing

[dyingtolive]

I find it interesting that Malaysia would be claiming there should be copyright protection for foods, when there isn't any kind of copyright protection for anything else in that country/region -- not in any real sense.

Well, it's all well and fine until it's something YOU could make money off of..

Re:Kind of amusing

[PCM2]

Well, it's all well and fine until it's something YOU could make money off of..

Sounds like a market failure to me. True, Malaysians were buying knockoff DVDs -- but note, they were buying them. In many cases, the products in question weren't available through legitimate channels at any price. In my case, the products in question weren't even available in the U.S. In fact, I still can't buy a copy of the original "Star Wars" without getting a copy of the computer-altered version along with it, and the sound and picture on the original movie are inferior to the version I don't want to see.

Then again, many of the DVDs for sale were cams of first-run movies. But someone was making money off them -- why couldn't the studios? Perhaps the answer is that they weren't willing to accept profit margins as low as the Malaysian bootleggers'. Still, the idea that you're going to turn an entire nation with its own culture into American-style consumers who pay U.S. prices just because you say so strikes me as naïve in the extreme.

Re:Kind of amusing

[shadowblaster]

You could get DVD-5 copies for about $5 and the DVD-9s were about $8

Dude, you got ripped off. They probably gave you the "foreigner price". Normally these are about $2 and if you buy 10, you get 1 for free.

Re:Kind of amusing

[PCM2]

Cry me a river. I bet if I went to Hong Kong I could buy Top Ramen for 1/8 of one cent instead of the 15 cents I pay now.

Human Foot?

[W. Justice Black]

Does anyone but me have a problem with the title "Malaysia Seeking to Copyright Food?" right above a picture of a human foot?

It's a defensive move

[bhagwad]

This is probably a move to protect itself from someone else doing the same. Some time ago, a US based Yoga teacher tried to patent some yogic positions, and there was a furor in India for obvious reasons. It happened again for Basmati rice which is grown in India - someone from another country patented it. I'm guessing the Malaysians are doing this so that the same thing doesn't happen to their foods.

Trying to copyright a patent?

[Jane Q. Public]

Seems to me they are actually trying to claim a patent but calling it a "copyright". Won't work either way.

We'll just make very slight veriations, and call them "blowjus", "itsafel", "bouleh bouleh", and so on. Let them try to do anything about it.

The whole idea is ridiculous.

So which country/state is claiming Spam?

[Shadow of Eternity]

We need to get an embargo on them pronto.

The Only Thing That They Should Be Allowed To Own.

[Nom du Keyboard]

The only thing that they should be allowed to own in this regard would be the name of a food item prefixed by their country name, e.g. Lebanese Hummus Other countries could have their own variations and the consumer could chose the "authentic" version of their choice.

Since when has there been a world-wide "copyright" anyway?

This is great news

[Budenny]

And we look forward to more occasions when some kinds of food will be illegal to sell or serve outside of their native location.

For example, we cannot wait for the time when Yorkshire Pudding will vanish from all menus not in Yorkshire. When the Melton Mowbray pie will cease to exist except in the town of that name. When Brie will be confined to the town of Brie, and not Brie sur Seine either. When the Frankfurter will be unobtainable except by travelling to Frankfurt.

When the London Irish rugby club will only be able to have players who are both Irish and Londoners, and the Royal Irish Guards will consist only of men who are both Royal and Irish. A rare and distinctive combination.

What we need is truth in advertising and respect for local traditions. Cheshire cheese for instance, why should we have any uncertainty about where that was made. Or the even more disgracefully abused Cheddar. The fine Cheddar Gorge is the only place on the planet which should be permitted to make or serve it. Go through your supermarket shelves, you North Americans, and remove all that orange goop you have there. There is only one true Cheddar, and we Cheddarians have it.

And the Norwalk Island Sharpie shall never sail outside the sacred waters of Norwalk, nor shall the Cornish Shrimper ever fish in the waters off Devon. Yessir, the world is going to be a different and better place from here on in.

Thank goodness, we will no longer be obliged to see the New York Times on sale wherever we travel in the US, and the International Herald Tribune will only be available internationally.

Some of us cannot wait!

We Got Dibs On "Freedom Fries" !!!

[NeverVotedBush]

Yeah, let's see China knock those off!

If I ignore them, then what?

[Hurricane78]

Are they going to go to war with my country?
Or is my country going to expel me? (And the thousand others who are also doing it.)

I don't think so.

So nothing is going to happen. The foreign minister is going to demand me to be punished.
My foreign minister will laugh into his face.
Their head of state will protest.
My head of state will laugh in his face. Harder.
Their state will declare us "evil"
We well laugh even harder at the insanity of a crazy state.
People will forget it.
The end.

Re:If I ignore them, then what?

[jimwelch]

Trade sanctions
Trade fines
World Court, etc.

There is no such thing as a sovereign nation anymore.

Re:If I ignore them, then what?

[daveime]

Usually they just find "evidence of WMDs" and then bomb your ass into oblivion.

This just in...

[TrebleJunkie]

...Sweden is under attack from the Narns, over Breen/Swedish Meatballs.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

It's more like trademarks

[tepples]

This is not a copyright or patent issue, nor is it strictly a trademark issue either. It is the seldom-referenced fourth category of "intellectual property," geographical indicators.

The fourth category is trade secrets. Geographical indicators are so close in intent to trademarks that some, such as "GROWN IN IDAHO" seal, have actually been registered.

Champagne is 'sparkling wine'

[synthesizerpatel]

This is essentially a trademark issue rather than an 'ownership' issue. Basically, if you sell a food product type under a name assumed from another geographic region, the argument is that you dilute the brand name if it's not 'really' from that geographic location. Champagne originated in France, so they fought for that trade mark. California wineries did the same thing ensuring that only wine that originates from Napa Valley can be labeled 'Napa Valley'.

While it's kind of dumb to say, the open source analogy here is actually somewhat humorous -- if you fork a project, generally you don't use the same name. I suppose you could, but in general the distinctive new name is used to set you apart from the original project. Imagine 100 forks of the Linux kernel each named 'Linux' with slightly different code bases with completely different hierarchies of submit control -- only one of them really would be the original Linux. Wouldn't you want to enforce that distinction with a trademark? ... Oh wait.. They do!

Same basic idea, except with food names.

 

Sterling Silver beef

[tepples]

Chances are, you're not buying Prime at the supermarket.

Some regional supermarket chains sell Sterling Silver brand beef. Sterling Silver is either Prime or the top tier of Choice. (The difference is that Prime has more marbling than Choice.) But you're right that many people think Choice-AAA rib is good enough.

No one else can make hummus?

[Jason Levine]

Toss some chickpeas into this blender with some garlic, olive oil, lemon juice. Add in some tahini and some spices. Blend and we have... copyright infringement?!!

Re:No copyright for recipes in Western world

[Daimanta]

"The recipe for Stilton Cheese [stiltoncheese.com] is well known, but you can only call it Stilton if it has been made in the three Counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire. It cannot be made in the village of Stilton that gave it its name since, at the time the EU came up with the definition, it had been forgotten that it had ever been produced there!"

But wait, there is more.

- it can only be produced in the three Counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire
- it must be made from locally produced milk that has been pasteurised before use
- it can only be made in a cylindrical shape
- it must be allowed to form its own coat or crust
- it must never be pressed and
- it must have the magical blue veins radiating from the centre of the cheese

Stilton actually contains magic. Stilton cheese is awesome!

Maybe Malaysia shouldn't copy either then

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with protecting foodstuffs is that there obviously are very strong cultural influences between Indonesia and Malaysia, as both countries have been trading with each other for centuries. They're each others' neigbours and are situated in similar geological regions. Even their official languages are so similar that if you speak one, you'll get by just fine in the other country.

I'd personally think it unreasonable if certain dishes, which both countries have had in common for centuries, would suddenly be attributed to any one of these countries. The recipe may have been forked somewhere in the past, but the change history was lost.

A friend of mine (from Indonesia) recently went visiting Malaysia and saw a traditional dance there. Turns out, the steps were awfully familiar. More than that- the dancers were wearing ulos, which are traditional Batak clothing (specifically, in this case, ulos originating from the Toba region of North Sumatera, Indonesia). That's not just like copying Scottish kilts- it's like copying the pattern of a specific clan and claiming it as your own.

Point being- you win some, you lose some. These two cultures have been enriching each others traditions for centuries. Why stop that?

Copyrighting Recipes

[Jason Levine]

A food blogger posted a variation on a potato salad recipe that she liked. She attributed the original source even though the recipe was altered. The source of the original recipe (Cook's Illustrated/Cook's Country) countered with a cease and desist notice claiming "no modifications allowed. Our recipes are tested up to 100 times for a reason (i.e. because they work)."

So let's say you get a really good pasta recipe from Cook's but you don't like the broccoli that's in it. You can't replace it with snow peas. After all, they tested their recipe and it is perfect so you can't improve upon it. Or if that "perfect" recipe calls for sausage and you're a vegetarian. No leaving that sausage out! Cook it the "Cook's perfect" way and like it! And Flying Spaghetti Monster help you if you post a variation on that pasta recipe, even if it is radically altered.

Here's a blog post about the incident: http://maurarose.livejournal.com/tag/cooks+country It looks like the original blog has gone invite only (possibly in part due to Cook's threatening to sue if they posted any modified recipes). I'm not sure what happened with the cease and desist notice.

I support Malaysia's copyright effort

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had Nasi Lemak and hope Malaysia can restrict other countries from making this dish.

Solution

[Nerdposeur]

Clearly, the only way to honor these deep cultural traditions is to put a video camera in the kitchen of every American, and send in the cops the moment anyone makes tabouli.

If matter can be represented as information...

[zoeblade]

...then food could possibly one day be copyrighted on the genetic or even molecular level. I wrote a story which hints at this a short while ago.

They can have it

[kylben]

Perhaps the Malaysian government would like me to send them back the nesi lemak I had for lunch today, since they claim it is theirs? I expect it to be ready to... ummmm... "ship" by morning.

As an Englishman...

[JustNiz]

As an Englishman I herby claim for my nation copyright on Bangers and Mash, Fish n' Chips, and boiled vegatables that have been cooked so long they taste awful.

Yeah, kind of odd

[Anonymous Coward]

The funny thing is that it is not just Americans. Far too many ppl want exactly what they grew up with and refuse to try other things. They consider it disgusting. I see lots of ppl from EU, China, etc that do not want to eat local foods, just because they think that it is weird. For example, many in EU will not have Rockymountain Oysters, Peanut Butter, Tongue, tripe, liver, etc. Of course, most Americans will not eat steak tartare (love it), horse, dog, etc. Personally, I am willing to try just about any culturally accepted food except for horse or dog. But different strokes.

Monsanto

[JAZ]

isn't that Monsanto's MO.

Patent the food crop and sue anyone that grows it, right?

Re:No copyright for recipes in Western world

[lePooch]

What really surprises me is that Malaysia is trying to copyright foods that were originally NOT from that region. Nasi lemak is only partly Malaysian - the rice made with screwpine leaves is unique to the region. But trying to copyright the spicy sauce(sambal) or the fried chicken that comes with it is ridiculous! Even the word "sambal" is ripped straight from Tamil, a South Indian language. Most Malaysian cuisine is a straight rip from Chinese and Indian cuisine, from the simplest sambal right up to the dishes mentioned in the article such as laksa and Hainanese chicken rice. Having spent my teenage years there, it is kind of ironic that a country where the latest movies are sold at street corners for a mere $1 per DVD(buy 5 get 1 free!) wants to copyright food that its immigrants brought in.

Same thing in Thailand - but also Canada!

[penguinchris]

I can echo your statement for Thailand as well - except that I don't think there are these copyright cop sweeps as you've described in Malaysia. Actually, it was quite refreshing - you are essentially free to do as you wish there, other than actual harmful crimes like robbery (of physical items) and violence.

The point of my reply, though, is to point out that this kind of institutionalized bootlegging exists in North America as well - if you're ever in Toronto check out the Pacific Mall - "North America's Largest Indoor Asian Mall" (http://www.pacificmalltoronto.com/). There are at least ten or so separate shops selling bootleg DVDs and CDs. A lot of it is Asian stuff that isn't officially distributed in the US or Canada, yes, but easily 25% of it is mainstream Hollywood movies. It's a weird place... it's a nice mall in an upscale suburb in Canada, but with blatant bootlegging all over the place! Actually, there are a lot of official releases as well (of both Asian and Hollywood stuff), but I'm not sure how many people actually buy it (same deal as in any marketplace in Asia).

I don't know if perhaps they have the same thing going on, where they close down on certain days to avoid getting busted, but I've been there several times and the same shops have always been there and are always open.

Three words

[e2d2]

Baked Potato Sandwich. I own it. Copy it and be sent to prison.

RTFA

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

I find it interesting that Malaysia would be claiming there should be copyright protection for foods, when there isn't any kind of copyright protection for anything else in that country/region -- not in any real sense.

Malaysia isn't actually claiming copyright on food. The use of the term "copyright" here is nothing more than typical Slashdot journalistic standards. What actually has happened is that some minister of something in Malaysia claimed... something over some specific dishes or recipes. What the hell that claim is, what acts are supposed to constitute violations of it, and what exactly the guy thinks should happen to people who violate it, well, that's something that's far from clear.

Re:RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. What she claimed was that Malaysia should "lay claim" to its "national dishes" before other countries become associated with them globally. Without being specific about which countries, but it is clear she meant a certain island nation to the South of the Malay peninsular which historically was part of Malaya - therefore has the same "national dishes" and happens to be better at marketing itself to Western nations. The locals have almost universally ridiculed the idea, especially as one of the dishes she specifically named was Hainese Chicken Rice.

Indeed, not at all like Europe.

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

You can get a "Philly Cheesesteak" just about anywhere in the US, but that's irrelevant to somebody who judges by quality. Imagine how absurd it would be to shut down the thousands of fake phillies all over the country just to benefit some rat who's got the law on his side.

Indeed, that is the reason why the Malaysia claim is not like Protected Designations of Origin. It is worth mentioning, though, that Europe, the stronghold of PDO laws, works the same way as the USA in this regard. An analogue to a Philly Cheesesteak in Europe would be something like Paella Valenciana--a dish whose name incorporates the name of a place (Valencia). That doesn't get legal protection in the EU--a restaurant outside Valencia can call its own dish a "Paella Valenciana" if it wishes.

Have it your way.

[pclminion]

Okay Malaysia, I'll play your game. Instead of calling it nasi lemak, I'll call it "creamy rice," and my customers will just think it's some American invention. The word Malaysia will never enter their thoughts. They'll never wonder how good the food might taste if they actually visited Malaysia. Instead of being an advertisement of your country and culture, it'll just be a source of profit for me.

Re:Have it your way.

[cheros]

You might want to be careful with calling something "creamy"..

This is why I love copyright

[Anonymous Coward]

Just when you think things can't get any sillier, *bam!*, they come out with a gem like this.
Priceless :)

Hey, feel free to copyright...

[IonOtter]

...Nasi Kangkang

I'm sure your wife or girlfriend will appreciated it.

And a song too

[Anonymous Coward]

In addition to the dance, there was a controversy on the song "Rasa Sayang".

Hainanese Chicken Rice

[Anonymous Coward]

"Chili crab is Malaysian. Hainanese chicken rice is Malaysian. We have to lay claim to our food," Ng said.

Isn't it amazing that they are claiming Hainanese chicken rice, a dish originated from Hainan, China, is a Malaysian dish?

You got word that different...

[Genda]

MMMMMMmmmmmm, grab a handful of those spicy Malaysian eyeballs... the snack you can't sneak up on!

copyright all you want...

[FatdogHaiku]

The seeds for the grains are all already patented.. so fuck a bunch of copyright... Hard to make the intellectually copyrighted food without the physically patented hardware, the non-reproducing seeds.

Oh, maybe we could get a licensing wars going too! No, you can't use our proprietary wheat, corn, rice, soy, or whatever because you have previously released your recipes as open source!

So, then we get an open source program from an Heirloom Seed program going and the big ConGloms say we can't use any of their fertilizers or insect control methods and...
oh crap
someone wants the baker to pay a royalty anytime a passer-by smells the fresh baked bread...

Jeez that's all so depressing...

Their tourism minister said ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Here is their tourism minister blog:

http://blog.drngyenyen.com/?p=531

She said that "Hainanese Chicken Rice" is Malaysian, while you know, Hainan is part of China. Silly or stupid or both?

Chinese knockoffs !!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's too funny - you know what Malaysia's Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ng Yen Yen said:

"We cannot continue to let other countries hijack our food. Chilli crab is Malaysian. Hainanese chicken rice is Malaysian. We have to lay claim to our food,â http://blog.drngyenyen.com/?p=531

I guess no one bothered to tell her that Hainan, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan, is in fact, a province of China.
So, Chinese "knockoffs", are in fact, quite likely.

Caution: Ensure brain is engaged before putting mouth into gear...

Derivative works...

[riflemann]

Does that mean that I could be sued for taking a shit after eating a Malay curry, on the basis that I'm making a "derivative work"?

This is what happens...

[Schraegstrichpunkt]

...when people view copyright as a fundamental human right, rather than a limited legal right created for particular purposes.

Malaysia's targeted food isn't even their own

[thespeech]

Much of the food that Malaysia is trying to copyright include dishes that Singaporeans have considered all along to be their own. For example, Hainanese chicken rice (which was apparently created by a guy from Hainan who set up shop in Singapore), "all kinds of laksa" (essentially noodles in spicy soup with prawns) and even chilli crab, which is apparently the dish the island is best known for (and never Malaysia). Many Singaporeans here believe this to be a response by the Tourism Minister to recover her country's injured pride after having been given a kicking by Indonesia over the dance incident.

Chili Crabs? Mexico has prior art!

[Tsu Dho Nimh]

Chilis are not native to Malaysia. They came from Mexico with the Spanish ships in the 1500s or 1600s.

Mexicans were cooking with chilis when Cortez & Co. arrived in the early 1500s, including cooking crabs with chilis.

Mexico has prior art and IP claims on the concept of cooking with chilis, chocolate, vanilla, avocados, tomatoes, turkeys, and corn. Peru has IP claims on cooking with potatoes. This means Europe has been stealing their cultural and culinary heritage for centuries. REPARATIONS ARE DUE!

You are a wine ignoramus.

[jotaeleemeese]

The champagne denomination describes a kind of drink that can be only made in the Champagne region.

No other part of the world has the same micro climate and soil, both of which influence the quality of the drink heavily (anybody that has tasted any other sparkling wines like Cava, who actually follows very closely the Champagne region methods, knows that it makes a difference, and prices reflect this).

Re:The Only Thing That They Should Be Allowed To O

[Anonymous Coward]

Well there's been some outcry in places like New York over the fact that Arab dishes like hummus, falafel, and lebanese bread are now being labeled "Israeli" food.

Mod parent +1 funny

[Anonymous Coward]

Best parody of a wine snob ever!

Re:No copyright for recipes in Western world

[skeeto]

In the Western world we patent food instead. See Monsanto.

IP confusion

[zarathud]

All this confusion over IP terminology...

Recipes can be copyrighted (the prose/description at least, not merely the ingredient list). To claim the kind of rights they're talking about here would require a patent. Of course, qualifying as novel and non-obvious would be difficult.