Is Photographing A Meal 'Taking Intellectual Property Away' From A Chef?
from the not-getting-the-point dept
Via Rob Hyndman, we discover that at least one chef believes that taking photos of food he cooks, and then posting them on the internet, is "taking" his "intellectual property." We've discussed in the past how restaurants are yet another area where a lack of copyright protection has actually helped innovation thrive. But, that doesn't mean that some chefs don't still feel excessive levels of ownership over certain aspects of what they do. We've occasionally seen lawsuits between similar restaurants, but could you take it even further?The article linked above, from Eater, talks to a number of different chefs to get their opinion on diners photographing the food that they're served. Most seem to have a grudging acceptance of the practice. The first chef, Sean Brock (from Husk and McCrady's in Charleston, South Carolina) appears to be the most enthusiastic, saying that he actually loves it when diners photograph the menu, because it even helps remind him what they made and also puts more pressure on the cooking staff to make sure the plates look good. However, a couple chefs down, there's RJ Cooper (from Rogue 24 in DC). He admits that they allow (non-flash) photography, mainly because he can't really stop it. But he's certainly not happy about it. After being asked if his opinion about people photographing dinner had changed, he said:
No, I still have the feeling. You're there for the dining experience with your companion, not to take photos of food. They publish food photos without your consent, which is taking intellectual property away from the restaurant. And also, generally, the photographs are terrible.I'm curious how this is "taking intellectual property away from the restaurant." Unfortunately, it seems like yet another sign of the kind of "ownership culture" that is being spread by copyright maximalists these days -- encouraging the world to think they have "ownership" over things they have absolutely no rights to. The restaurant can legally refuse to serve someone, or kick someone out of their restaurant for taking a photograph if they wanted (though, that would likely hurt the restaurant's reputation), but there simply is no serious intellectual property issue in having someone take a photograph of the dinner they were served. Is there a lawyer crazy enough to make an argument that the cooking and plating process creates enough creativity in a "fixed" manner that it deserves copyright? Perhaps, but even then I'd have a hard time believing the photograph was not perfectly legitimate fair use.
All in all, I think it's unfortunate that we keep seeing more and more examples of people believing they "own" aspects of culture and can prevent others from sharing them, and regret that this is what our culture has become in an era where kids are being (incorrectly) taught that copyright is just like "property" for things you create. It leads people into thinking they "own" anything they do.
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: food, husk and mcrady's, photography, rj cooper, rogue 24, sean brock
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
But... part of the dining experience is the food. People like to take photographs to remind themselves of good experiences, so taking pictures of food as well as the people you're dining with is part of the experience, surely?
Why is it that copyright maximalists always seem to start from a position of completely misunderstanding their own customers?
"They publish food photos without your consent, which is taking intellectual property away from the restaurant."
I also remember the meal I had, and might attempt to recreate it at home, sharing that experience with other people in the future. My God, I'm a pirate, lock me up!
It's worth noting that this is just another version of the "piracy = theft" idiocy, which some people still can't understand isn't true despite it being the very basis of their fallacious arguments. What a shame people still can't understand the basic concepts they're dealing with, let alone the reality of how things really work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The food was licensed
You should mail them the shit back you damn pirates!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But ... but ... but ... will someone please think of the starving chefs!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If I found such a crappy attitude at a restaurant...
The normal disposal facilities would not be appropriate in such a case as I'm sure the restaurant will need to agree disposal with the grower in some fashion too, surely?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have a feeling dining at one of Sean Brocks tables is way more fun then RJ Coopers, where I will get dirty looks for looking to long at the food.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As long as your eyes are glazed you can direct them anywhere you want at RJ Coopers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I do wonder what inquest you're worried about when they will care about all of your meals though!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So sorry, but alleged defamation claims are not covered under copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That makes me a bad person. I guess we should outlaw home kitchens to protect the Intellectual Property rights of chefs, since kitchens can be used to infringe on their Intellectual Property.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New Game developed by techdirt
add any text you want instead of the dots (the dots do not represent letters)
Making the sentence complete is the game and the fun part.
The answer of course is always, why yes there is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New Game developed by techdirt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tipping just got easier
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Everyone should already know that you're not BUYING that meal at a restaurant, you're just licensing a single use of the meal. You have no first sale rights either, so don't even THINK about taking home a doggie bag!
Sharing? Forget it.. That's a violation of the license right there. If you order a plate of fries you can NOT share with a friend, that's outright theft!
These restaurants hire workers of all sorts. Think of the dishwashers?! If you share a plate of fries with a friend you are depriving the dishwasher of an extra dish to clean and thereby hurting the industry and their ability to employ workers....
Silly people.. When will you learn..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The comments here...
There's probably an internet meme photo you could insert here if that's your thing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: if i buy it i can take a picture of it. end of story
Then again, if you've ever had to deal with chefs you'll know that too many of them have over-inflated egos without the brains to match.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: if i buy it i can take a picture of it. end of story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: if i buy it i can take a picture of it. end of story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: if i buy it i can take a picture of it. end of story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: if i buy it i can take a picture of it. end of story
It's also not black and white. A full shot of a person wearing a shirt that had a small logo would be much less likely to be considered infringing than a photo that was zoomed in to show only the logo. Also, a drawing which is "purely creative" would be treated much differently than a photo of common objects (such as a burger and fries) since there is only so many ways to arrange items on a plate.
Taking a picture of a copyrighted sculpture, building, etc. is infringement. I don't agree with that. I think if you're taking a picture of a three dimensional object, the photo is a sufficiently different work and the copyright should belong to the photographer.
For food, I think the plate would have to be considered a sculpture. However, since it's also functional (you're supposed to eat it) I doubt it would be given copyright protection. There are other factors that don't favor the chef. For example the photo is not going to compete with the original in the same market (you can't eat the photo). Also as I mentioned above, if multiple chefs make the same dish (which cannot be copyrighted by the way), there is only so many ways those components can be put on the plate. So in summary there is little or no copyright for plated dishes.
So if there's no copyright, by what method can a restaurant prohibit you from taking photos. I guess they could always throw you out but suppose the don't notice. Is there anything they can do about it after the fact? What about a small notice in the menu that sets forth dinner terms & conditions? Would that hold up? I don't know. They do seem to be able to write a notice about automatically included gratuity, but that is a much more common practice and you could argue that most dinners expect it.
Legalities aside, I wouldn't support being able to copyright "plating" because I just don't think it will benefit society. Chefs already make money from the diners. I don't care if they can't make royalties from food photographs.
If you read the linked article above, most of the chefs don't care and they give a good explanation about why some do. It's a misunderstanding of the creative process; not realizing that everyone borrows from everyone else. Creativity doesn't occur in a vacuum. It's a knee-jerk reaction that a lot of people have. Probably helped by all the brainwashing by the MPAA and others like them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: if i buy it i can take a picture of it. end of story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's right, chefs all over the world are taking a farmers original work of livestock and grain and creating derivitive works in their restaurants.
They should simply provide the work as is, to the customer. Chicken dish - here is your live chicken, sir.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I think that's what they do in California.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So if taking a photograph of the food (lets call it IP for brevity) is theft of intellectual property what would eating that same IP be. Remembering that it's not copying,, it's actual destruction and full removal of the IP, never to be ever had or seen by the creator again.
And to make it even worse, anywhere from 8 to 24hrs later that same stolen and destroyed IP is transformed into what some art critics of the IP would call a stinking pile of crap to be fit only to be flushed down the toilet of despair.
Oh the horror... Can't anyone think of the Chefs . We must somehow come up with a system to make these stinking thieves and pirates of all things edible pay for there destruction and recycling of this IP...
Wait...
hmmmm.. Bill please Garson
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The penalty for destroying property is a lot less than the penalty for copying it. After all, you are not really destroying the property, you are transforming it into something new, which then you can hold the copyright on. But when you copying something. Well that is much worse, and the whole world suffers. To include the big corporations which owns the property. Aren't you concerned about the big corporations.
Capt ICE Enforcer Out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
We could even send it via ICE, because as we all know, ICE keeps things moist and fresh ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's why IP as a term doesn't make sense. Destruction is a property right but the "owner" of "IP" doesn't have this right, nor any of the other rights associated with property ownership.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Any chef will tell you that a good portion of a dish's appeal is visual - they call it "presentation". If a plate looks horrible, people will be less likely to want to eat it. If it looks good, people will be more likely to want to eat it.
Have these idiots never thought that "hey, these photos of my food are being taken so they can be shared - if people like the presentation, that will make more people want to come to my restaurant!"????
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Of course not. This is merely a variation of the Pirate Credo of "free advertising" that you Mike's Kool Aid Drinking Freetarding Thieves (tm) think is a valid excuse for stealing (oh sorry, *sharing* ...pah!). You all just want your meals for free.
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lord, isn't it gauling when people who don't really a phrase or concept try to wield it as an argument but use it totally out of context?
You can't 'take away intellectual property' any more than you can 'erase somebody's memories' or 'stop them thinking about something'.
THOUGHT PROPERTY DOES NOT WORK, JESUS FUCHASLAAHWHLDHALWDLHAWLHDLAWHDHAWDHLAil4q3894p93q4;w3q4'w3q4#'w34'lw3'43'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Solution:
If one is that concerned with one's "brand" - offer up stock photos that put things in the light you want them put in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The ownership culture is more than just large corporations. You hear people bitching that people are poaching their facebook posts. You hear mothers-to-be bitching that some relative "stole" the name they were going to use for their child. Some people guard their recipes as if they're national secrets.
How is the pervasive ownership culture compatible with our culture of sharing? It doesn't seem to make any sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If food is IP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Getting his consent on the other hand might be difficult, though for something like that it would come down to the laws in the state he's in as to whether or not it's needed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Out roars the manager, asking me what I was doing and when I told him, he asked me to put my camera away. The shot included nothing more than the plate and the food, no proprietary surroundings or logos, nothing.
I did as he asked, smiling sweetly the whole time. When the waiter came around to refill our tea, I asked for a to-go box. Took the food home intact, laid it all out on a platter I had at the house, and took the shot. The image still sells regularly today.
People are cuhRAZY.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, thank god.
WTF is wrong with people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RJ Cooper, meet someone who understands how the world of food works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Something must be done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I remember the first time a waitress came to the kitchen, in probably 2002 or 3 and told us someone was taking pictures of our food.
We were proud of it when we heard, but apparently we missed the boat. I didn't realize we could be like aging rock stars and get future income from royalties that those thieves aren't paying now. I can just imagine those thieves flipping thru the photo album, and the sense of joy they have from stealing that picture.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes, because you're having his cake and eating it too and so now he has no cake and will starve!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's because the cake is a lie...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's called Food Porn
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What would be legit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seriously?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
These are the same people who love to sue people for leaving less than stellar feedback on public forums. Now RJ Cooper outed himself not only as a douche, but it's also clear that he doesn't even understand what intellectual property is. Way to go, RJ!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eventually none will be left
If enough photos are taken, eventually no intellectual property will be left.
It's like how each time you skip a commercial, a TV executive shrieks as though he was thrashed by a rabbit ear antenna from the era of when commercials were unskippable.
Or like how each time you hum a song, the RIAA executives become a little bit poorer, the collection societies a little bit richer, and the artist wondering where his cut is?
Didn't your mom ever tell you to stop photographing your food?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The future doesn't look to bright for arrogant chefs who don't want people photographing their food.
I hope this "issue" only gets worse for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
- wow that looks good, where was it
- at Rogue 24, don't go there though, the chef is a complete ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Celebrity Chefs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chefs prepare Food
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pandaexpress feedback program is an excellent place to get free meals. https://Pandaexpresscomfeedbackss.Com is giving a platform for its customers to leave their feedback about the restaurant. Complete the survey within the valid period of receipt to get confirmed free meal coupons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]