Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: not2easy
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.
The article also expresses the view that...
It's highly unlikely, [said Siva Vaidhyanathan, author of "Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of Intellectual Property and How it Threatens Creativity"] that anyone would be sued for putting someone else's published recipe -- with or without attribution -- in a charity cookbook or posting it on the Internet... In fact, said Vaidhyanathan, an assistant professor of culture and communications at New York University, it would be unusual even to receive a nasty letter about it. "There isn't (big) money at stake."
As the commentator states, that's in relation to republication for charity or the web, so what about using other people's recipes in a book?
Professional cooks who publish recipes that blatantly copy colleagues' work without attribution are often shunned or gossiped about, but even then, lawsuits are rare.
Ouch, so they may talk about you behind your back!
Ultimately then, if the legal risks appear to be minimal (based not on my view but on the opinions expressed in the article), it would seem to come down to a question of morality.
Would you take someone else's work and pass it off as your own, or use it for self gain?