Text 23232, 116 rader
Skriven 2011-12-01 21:40:02 av Lee Lofaso (2:203/2)
  Kommentar till text 23213 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: recipe patents/copywrites
=================================
Hello Roy,

 BF>> Sure enough you cannot patent a recipe or claim any other kind of
 BF>> commercial right to it,

 MV>> Isn't that what Coca Cola has been doing for over half a century?

RW>You can't patent/copywrite a list of ingredients, but you can p/c
RW>a set of directions.

What are the ingredients of Coca Cola?

RW>i.e. a recipe really can't be just a simple list of ingredients.

A bit of this, a bit of that, throw it all together, and voila!
A concoction has been made!  One can even call such a concoction
an actual recipe!  Even if it is a recipe for disaster!

RW>Which is the part of the formula that Coca Cola keeps secret.

What is the complete list of ingredients used to make Coca Cola?
The CEO of Coca Cola might know.  The head honcho of the FDA might
know.  But I very seriously doubt Roy Witt knows.

RW>There are other colas made here that taste the same,

RW>yet Coca Cola hasn't claimed any patent/copywrite infringement.
RW>And IMO, Royal Crown Cola, aka RC tastes better than Coke or Pepsi.
RW>Not to mention the 'store' brand name colas.

What are the 23 flavors of Dr. Pepper?  Good Golly, Miss Rolly!
Roy's Folly really does not know!

Zee only ting dat can be said is RC Cola and Moon Pies go hand
in hand together!  Especially at NASCAR races in the Southland...

 BF>> but you sure as hell have the right to have your name on it if it's
 BF>> your own "invention".

 MvdV>> If you would publish it as if it were your own, it would be
 MvdV>> plagiarism.

 BF>> Probably not over there. Just look at Disney and how they took
 BF>> old German fairy tales and shamelessly made them their own.

 MV>> The problem with them is that they use double standards.

RW>How so?

Copycat recipes are nothing new.  Some copycat recipes are even
better than the original.  However, that is not the issue of this
thread.  A recipe was posted in this echo, a participant claiming
credit for that recipe.  That recipe was taken from a web site.
And that recipe was NOT created by the participant who posted it
in this forum.  Not only was the list of ingredients the same,
but the directions as to how to make the potato salad was also
the same.  IOW, the participant STOLE the recipe from a web site,
posting that very same web site here, in this forum, WITHOUT
PERMISSION OR GIVING CREDIT TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

 RW> Disney took an old fairy tale and made a movie that they own the copywrite
 RW> to. It's their work that is copywrited, not the content of the fairy tale
 RW> it is based on.

Disney owns the copyright to Mickey Mouse.  If you (or anybody else)
use the image of Mickey Mouse on a web site without having received
prior written permission from Disney, you will be sued big time.  Not
by me, but by Disney.

From a writer's standpoint -

There are only 36 forms of plot.  I am not going to go into
details.  Only to say there are only 36 forms of plot (and variations
thereof).  Nobody can copyright a plot.  However, an author can
copyright a work, whether that work be a story, poem, or whatever.
The same thing applies to food.  Nobody can copyright a food item.
Nobody can copyright a food group.  However, authors can copyright
a literary work that is a collection of the author's recipes, or
a collection of somebody else's recipes (for example, a collection
of Cajun recipes put together by the author).

 MV>> It /they/ rip something from the Internet and re-use it, it is all
 MV>> right.

RW>LOL! Until the FBI knocks on your door, perhaps.

The FBI does have what they call a cybercrime task force.
And that cybercrime task force does make house calls.
Sometimes without even knocking.  :)

 MV>> If you do the same with some pictures of beautiful women, all hell
 MV>> brakes loose.

RW>Those pictures are the property of Playboy magazine and the
RW>beautiful women in them gave Playboy exclusive rights to those
RW>photos. That makes those photos the intellectual property of
RW>Playboy.

Those beautiful women did not just give Playboy exclusive
rights to those photos.  They SOLD Playboy the rights to those
exclusive photos.  Playboy merely paid a photographer to take
the photos, along with paying the women to show off their lovely
bodies to the photographer (and to the world).

RW>Felten the Pirate new that when he offered them on his website
RW>for download.

The only taker was Herman Cain.  Until he found the real thing.
Which apparently derailed his bid for the presidency.  But then,
Herman Cain was always more of a performance artist rather than
a politician.  :)

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb
 * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)