Comments on: On food blog ethics

By: Tangled Noodle

Tangled Noodle — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:23:51 +0000

There are so many issues regarding the ethics of blogging (specifically, food blogs) about which I’m keen to learn. Some are relevant to me as a reader, such as credibility of a review that may or may not be biased due to certain gratuities and other special treatment by the service/product provider. Others strike me more as a writer, especially the issue of plagiarism. I am so disappointed to come across a blog whose content is cobbled together through cut-and-paste jobs from Wikipedia and other food-related sites, all without attribution.

What has surprised me the most is the rather heated opposition that these ‘codes of ethics’ have received. Instead of being viewed as guidelines, some believe that they impinge on their creative process. But I say that they protect that very same process by ensuring that original content is credited to the rightful source. I hope that ‘blogger ethics’ continues to be a topic at the forefront of discussion as blogging experiences the inevitable pains of growth.

By: msprompt

msprompt — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 16:26:47 +0000

Great post. Interesting stuff about recipe copyright. Thanks for teaching and sharing. Hope the re-writes weren’t too dreadful.

By: Cynthia Furey

Cynthia Furey — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:45:32 +0000

Hbgrrl: Agreed! A certain degree of responsibility goes hand in hand with food blogging. That said, I’ve rewritten most of the recipes I’ve gotten from other sources (save for the sentences that could not be reworded without sounding weird). Thanks for reading!

By: hbgrrl

hbgrrl — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 02:10:49 +0000

I’m not one to quibble with a recipe’s ’source’ as long as credit is given where credit is due. I also think that as long as you aren’t using someone’s recipe for personal gain, e.g. entering it in a contest and claiming it’s your own, then no harm no foul.

I DO take exception to the ‘anonymous’ source on eater.com spreading garbage around about people who are just trying to make a living. While I think in interest of basic journalism and the freedom of press, anonymous sources should be protected, when an anonymous source deliberately trashes a person’s ability to persue a livelihood, all bets are off. Shame on you. ‘anonymous’ source.

By: Cynthia Furey

Cynthia Furey — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:21:07 +0000

Hello Elise! I agree, I think it would be a little hard to rewrite the directions of how to saute an onion without getting really flowery. It makes a lot of sense. Thank you very much for the tips! One can never get enough legal advice in this day and age.

By: Elise

Elise — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 06:38:16 +0000

Actually, the method directions are not copyright protectable either, unless the instructions are highly personalized or literary (constituting “substantial literary expression”). The reason is that recipes are considered “ideas” or “methods”. Copyright protects only the original expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves. In the case of recipes, basic instructions are not protectable. There are only a few ways to say “saute an onion for 5 minutes”. This is why it is important when you write recipes to personalize the instructions if you can. It will make them more protectable. Also collections of recipes are protectable, as the collection, or vetting, is considered the author’s original expression. Citing the source is not a legal requirement, but an expected courtesy. That all said, it is a very good idea to rewrite any recipes you take from other sources in your own words. (How do I know all this? I retain 2 intellectual property attorneys.)