# Cooks Illustr. cole slaw recipe



## marajo (Nov 15, 2006)

I would like to find a recent cole slaw recipe that was in Cooks Illustrated mag.  Anyone subscribe?  thank you.


----------



## kitchenelf (Nov 15, 2006)

Just a note to prevent a bunch of "red tape" - if anyone has this recipe please send a private message to marajo versus posting it so we don't have any copyright violations.  Thanks!


----------



## bullseye (Nov 15, 2006)

marajo said:
			
		

> I would like to find a recent cole slaw recipe that was in Cooks Illustrated mag.  Anyone subscribe?  thank you.


I can PM it to you, but they have _pages_ of cole slow recipes.  Can you be more specific?


----------



## marajo (Nov 15, 2006)

I had no idea recipes were protected by copyright law.  No idea what the recipe is. A woman told me she was using it this Thanksgiving, is all I know.  Thanks for helping.


----------



## Gretchen (Nov 16, 2006)

I am not questioning the custom/rules of this board (not posting recipes) but
I don't think recipes are covered by copyright unless they are a kind of "signature" dish. It is nice to attribute the recipe. 


I have read better/more specific referrals to copyright of recipes, but here is one from the Washington Post.

U.S. copyright law addresses recipes, but what holds sway can be called either ethics or etiquette. Cooking is not considered inventing; rather, it evolves. Copyright law specifies that "substantial literary expression in the form of an explanation or directions," such as a cookbook, can be copyrighted but that a mere list of ingredients cannot receive that protection.
The ethics guidelines of the International Association of Culinary Professionals focus on giving proper attribution to recipes that are published or taught. The association advises using the words "adapted from," "based on" or "inspired by," depending on how much a recipe has been revised. ("Adapted from" is the phrasing favored by The Washington Post and many other newspaper food sections, which, along with culinary instructors, enjoy "fair use" of someone's creation for the purpose of teaching, news reporting, scholarship or research.) The only time a recipe should be printed without attribution, the association contends, is when it has been changed so substantially that it no longer resembles its source.
In cyberspace, however, there's some confusion about where to draw the line. Many Web sites carry warnings about posting "copyrighted" material, but most do not define what that means in cooking circles.
Rachel Rappaport, a Baltimore teacher, operates a blog called Coconut & Lime in which she shares recipes she has liked. She says her understanding -- a common one -- is that if she changes two or three ingredients in a recipe, it becomes her own and requires no attribution.


----------



## Andy M. (Nov 16, 2006)

Gretchen:

Copyright issues are indeed difficult.  We have struggled to develop a policy that makes sense and protects us and our members.  Your quote is correct in that you cannot copyright a list of ingredients.  That being the case, changing "two or three ingredients in a recipe" does not make it your own.

Substantial changes to the instructions will avoid copyright issues.  What constitutes 'substantial' is a matter of judgment as applied by the moderators and Admins.

If you post a copyrighted recipe word for word and include an attribution, you are, in effect, admitting to a violation of copyright law.

Just about every recipe website and all cookbooks have copyright statements. Copying and pasting is a clear violation in both cases unless you have written permission for a specific use from the author or publisher.

Our copyright policy was developed with professional legal help to be effective yet manageable for our members.


----------



## thymeless (Nov 16, 2006)

marajo said:
			
		

> I had no idea recipes were protected by copyright law.  No idea what the recipe is. A woman told me she was using it this Thanksgiving, is all I know.  Thanks for helping.


Copyright law on recipes is weak. It's just expensive to defend against allegations and forums run on super tight budgets. So DC is proactive to protect themselves and this community against the fiscal reality of the courts rather than what the law and fair use actually permit.

It's more about budgets and protecting the forums than the law.

Here's the government site on the issue.  http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html

thymeless


----------



## kitchenelf (Nov 16, 2006)

Well said thymeless - and it's just not our budget - along with us possibly being find the poster can also be fined those same six figures.

marajo - please do not be "spooked" by what we have said here - ask away for any recipe you are looking for.  It's just that we do have to have guidelines about posting them.  But there is ALWAYS a way to get the recipe you ask for!


----------



## thymeless (Nov 16, 2006)

There was a tiime in the 1990s when Texas Instruments most profitable division was their legal division. 

They made more money prosecuting contract/license/patent issues than they did with their products....

With the new penalties of the DCMA and other copyright nonsense, the publishers could soon realize the profitability of the court room too.

I am a writer. The copyright protects ME. But the way it's gone and going still is ludicrous.

thymeless


----------



## jennyema (Nov 16, 2006)

Recipes themselves are indeed copyrightable -- the US Copyright Office says so:

"Mere listings of ingredients as in recipes, formulas, compounds or prescriptions are not subject to copyright protection. However, where a recipe or formula is accompanied by substantial literary expression in the form of an explanation or directions, or when there is a combination of recipes, as in a cookbook, there may be a basis for copyright protection."

The Post article's paraphrasing of this statement is misleading, IMO, as it leads one to believe that only cookbooks are copyrightable.

Lists of ingredients cannot be copyrighted, thus changing any number of the ingredients doesn't help you avoid copyright violations involving the part of the recipe that is protected. Likewise, attribution also does not absolve you of liability should you distribute a copyrighted work without permission. In fact, it's the opposite -- it's an admission that the work is not your own.

There are exceptions to copyright laws involving "fair use," like reprinting a copyrighted recipe for teaching, for critique, to ask a question, etc. but posting a copyrighted recipe on a site like DC for the purpose of distributing it to the memebrs probably is not fair use. 

Like KE and Thyme have said the civil penalty for a "knowing" copyright violation is $250,000. So if DC knows that a recipe -- or article -- or anything is protected by copyright, that's the possible consequence for us. And for you. So it's something that we need to be careful of.


----------



## marajo (Nov 17, 2006)

This discussion has been most enlightening. And, I was given a copy of the recipe (from the source who 1st discussed it w/ me). It is not from Cooks Illust. but rather Bon Apetite.  Thanks for all the feed back.


----------



## kitchenelf (Nov 17, 2006)

That's the most important thing - you got the recipe!!!!!!!  

Yes, the topic got waaaaaaaaaay off - sorry about that!  Don't be a stranger around here!!!!!  Looking forward to your participation!


----------



## jennyema (Nov 18, 2006)

marajo said:
			
		

> This discussion has been most enlightening. And, I was given a copy of the recipe (from the source who 1st discussed it w/ me). It is not from Cooks Illust. but rather Bon Apetite. Thanks for all the feed back.


 
Ironically, many Bobn Appetit recipes are available at epicurious.com


----------

