Bartenders Looking For Greater Intellectual Property Protection For Drinks
from the are-you-serious? dept
Copycense points us to yet another story about another person in another industry whining about not getting enough monopoly privileges from the government. This time, believe it or not, it's bartenders wanting to protect mixed drink recipes. Seriously. Unfortunately, the writeup at the Atlantic, by food writer Chantal Martineau seems to get an awful lot of points about intellectual property totally mixed up. The article slips back and forth between trademark law and copyright law (which are extremely different) and then has this whopper:The publication of a recipe can be legally protected, but the "expression of an idea," as the lawyers in the seminar explained, cannot. It's the reason musicians can't be sued for covering another band's song in a live show.So many things wrong in two short sentences. First of all, no, the publication of a recipe cannot be protected. Straight from the US Copyright Office: "Mere listings of ingredients as in recipes, formulas, compounds, or prescriptions are not subject to copyright protection." That said, if there is "substantial literary expression" in, say, the description of how to prepare the recipe that part (and that part alone) could be covered by copyright, but that should have little impact on bartenders making similar mixed drinks. Also, copyright is, in fact, supposed to protect the expression, contrary to the statement above. This is the whole basis of the idea-expression dichotomy, which Martineau seems to get backwards. As for why musicians can't be sued for covering another band's song in a live show, that's got nothing to do with the difference between an expression and an idea, and everything to do with performance rights licenses from venues to PROs like ASCAP and BMI that (in theory) are supposed to cover the copyright (yes, there is one) on the composition.
As for the meat of the actual article, there's a lot that's very troubling in there, though Martineau doesn't seem to challenge any of the claims made (given the confusion on the topic, perhaps that's why). It starts off with a story about a trademark violation, when a new Manhattan lounge called Painkiller was threatened with a cease-and-desist from the distillery Pusser's, who had apparently trademarked a drink called Painkiller back in 1989. But the only issue there is the name (which is trademarked), not the recipe. So it's odd that this is used as a lead in to a discussion about copyright.
The actual story focuses around an apparently angry bartender, Eben Freeman, who seems to be upset that he doesn't get enough credit for inventing certain drinks:
After the seminar, I spoke to Freeman, who admitted he came up with the idea for the talk after becoming fed up with other bartenders and establishments taking credit for and profiting from his recipes and techniques. (Fat washing, for example, the process by which a spirit can be infused with, say, bacon, was pioneered in part by Freeman, yet is often attributed to others.) "Someone needs to get sued ... to set a precedent," he told me.Of course, Freeman is exaggerating the claim that bartenders "have less protection than anyone else." He has just as many protections, it's just that you can't copyright a recipe. If it's true that he really did come up with a novel and non-obvious process for "fat washing" (I really don't want to know), then he could have applied for a patent on it, but in an article confused about trademarks and copyright law, no one even mentions patents. Perhaps Freeman should have done some research first.
"In no other creative business can you so easily identify money attached to your creative property," Freeman went on. "There is an implied commerce to our intellectual property. Yet we have less protection than anyone else."
From there the article goes off on a totally random tangent about how big liquor companies have been hiring young bartenders to become "brand ambassadors" where they're expected to come up with a signature drink using the specific brands in question. But, the accusation is, these bartenders "don't have the experience" to do so, and instead just copy someone else's recipe and tweak it. Of course, that's not illegal. At all. And it's not a problem. It's how innovation happens. You build on the ideas of others, and you tweak it to try to make it better. There's nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, it should be celebrated. In fact, we've seen how the very same lack of copyright protection over recipes has helped food and restaurant trends grow and spread in valuable ways. Instead, this just seems like a complaint about someone who doesn't like young bartenders and the way they work. But that's not an intellectual property issue.
Over at the Washington Post, Ezra Klein does a nice job pointing out that, just as with fashion copyright, there's no evidence for a need for a "drink copyright,":
As is always the case with granting individuals legalized monopolies over intellectual property, we should start by asking whether consumers are suffering because bartenders don't have enough financial incentive to innovate interesting new drinks. Given that the past few years have seen an incredible explosion in creative mixology, that's a hard case to make. The status quo seems perfectly good at encouraging innovation -- so much so that the drinks have gotten increasingly comical.But, of course, the reason that Freeman's complaint and Martineau's article don't ask those rather basic questions, is that it appears both don't realize that intellectual property is supposed to be about incentives, rather than protectionism and making sure that some guy who created something "gets his proper credit." Freeman's complaint comes off more as someone who just doesn't feel he's received enough recognition for his work as a grumpy old bartender. But that's got absolutely nothing to do with intellectual property law -- patents, trademarks or copyrights -- and should have no bearing on whether or not he likes young bartenders coming up with derivative drinks.
And it's not just that there's no evidence that consumers are being harmed by the current arrangement. There's clear evidence that they're benefiting from it. I live in Washington. But a lot of really good cocktails are thought up in San Francisco. Happily, I can drink a lot of those cocktails, as the most successful recipes quickly proliferate.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bartenders, copyright, drinks, eben freeman, intellectual property, patents, trademark
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Bah??!!
Oh, hell YES you do, my friend. Fat washing is the technique by which you infuse fatty substances into liquor and then extract the fat, leaving the flavor in. It has resulted in one of the most splendiferous alcoholic creations known to man: Bacon infused vodka and bourbon.
http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/589978
[ link to this | view in thread ]
making similar mixed rinks
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Perhaps? P.S. I have about had it for the day already so forgive me
P.S. I have about had it for the day already so forgive me
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: making similar mixed rinks
[ link to this | view in thread ]
me me me
Our culture is willing to shove its peers and its progeny under the bus in exchange for ephemeral fame and fortune.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It appears most of Congress and the President (along with the DOJ and DOC) don't realize that intellectual property is supposed to be about incentives, rather than protectionism.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: making similar mixed rinks
At the typo pub. We have them on raft. Fixed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Bah??!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Perhaps? P.S. I have about had it for the day already so forgive me
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: making similar mixed rinks
We have them on raft.
LOL.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Its called the public domain ....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
@15
cause prices go through the roof as we're seeing and you can afford less and less....
capitalism on consumer side needs competition so one can have value and that drives innovation to do more or new things.
Patents and copyrights as they are now are eroding that very fast. I am against it all, but i think were going ot have to allow them to have forever patents and copyrights and have people die more to see how evil it really is.
AKA a few missing kids found dead that could have been found say by the same FBI that now polices IP more?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Perhaps? P.S. I have about had it for the day already so forgive me
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Bah??!!
I'm just sayin'...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Bah??!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Bah??!!
wow can't type today
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Eban Freeman Wants a Monopoly of a Technique Invented Hundreds of Years Ago.
In a technically mature area like fashionable clothing or fine cooking, you can practically never achieve the kind of novelty required for a patent. Experience indicated that, while some solvents, such as ethanol are merely intoxicating, others, such as methanol, are actively poisonous.
The kinds of "playing with technology" which some people are doing under the name of "molecular gastronomy," are essentially campy, and in the long run, they are bound to fail. In the long run, Coca Cola and Hormel Spam and Cheez Wiz are examples of what Molecular Gastronomy is all about. As a nondrinker, I am not very well placed to comment on alcoholic beverages. I do know something about cheese. Adding strong flavorings, such as pepper and garlic, is essentially something one does with cheese which isn't very good. A good cheddar can be eaten, as is, with a piece of bread or a cracker. A piece of bacon-flavored cheese (or, more precisely, "cheese-flavored product," as per USDA labeling regulations), when you taste it more closely, will always have chemical overtones.
Good foodstuffs are usually as old as the hills. Cheddar cheese derives its name from a village about ten miles outside of Bristol, in England. In the great age of sail, before 1800, Bristol was the great "blue water" seaport of England. Ships sailing from London tended to be going only as far as the Netherlands (ie. Benelux, at that date), a passage only lasting a few days. Ships sailing from Bristol tended to be going on long voyages lasting several months, real expeditions. So they required the best of provisions. The village of Cheddar organized a cheese-making cooperative, specializing in that kind of hard yellow cheese which actually improves when it is several months old, for which the sailors would pay a premium price. Similar cheeses were created in the other maritime nations of Western Europe. The Dutch "sea beggars" lived on Gouda cheese, for example when they went out to hunt down Spanish treasure fleets.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Eban Freeman Wants a Monopoly of a Technique Invented Hundreds of Years Ago.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Liquortarian
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who dreamed thish up? hic,..
Maybe the lawyers behind this were that crew Messrs Nummb & Nummber?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Bah??!!
As a vegetarian and teetotal person, that sounds so wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]