The Elephant in the room

[zandernwn]

Look it is clear to me that
1.) Share you recipe and it will be cloned and stolen and sold at a premium by backyard mechanics and premium vendors alike.

2.) It is a sad day that sharing something I feel so passionate about is limited due to unethical conduct. I could have helped - and this is the key to the conversation- many diyers with tasty recipes, instead I have to guard them to prevent these idiots from profiting from it. That is the essense.

3.) I resolve that I will share my recipes only within clised groups where there is a level of trust and I have resonable cinfidence that it will not be used inappropriatly.

This help comes at a great cost to me both in time and money. Anybody who knows me will attest that I have never held back any stricks, tips, secrets or recipes and that I share it freely to help them make beter recipes.

I will no longer do this. I will gladly help answer specific questions and answer that question to the best of my ability but I will not share recipe again.

I am not expecting you to care about that, it fact I am not vein enough to even think that it would. But that is my where is stand.



Sent from my HUAWEI CRR-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[RichJB]

But I do care for the culture we are creating and this will affect us all. Once we become a nuisance, we will draw even more negative publicity and ultimately targeted legaslature.

Well, the stolen recipe thing isn't creating a nuisance for non-vapers. If I regale non-vapers at a party with stories of how Wayne's recipes are stolen, their eyes will glaze over. They don't care and why should they? It has absolutely no impact on their lives.

It's also not like vaping is the only industry where piracy or IP theft occur. Almost every industry is rife with it. So I don't see how it marks vaping as being different or less principled than any other industry.

On the issue of legislation, I think more of it would be a good thing. For example, I don't agree with vapers being sold batteries whose amperage rating is vastly over-stated by the manufacturer. So I think we do need more controls. The trick is ensure that legislation/regulation serve to protect the consumer, not to obliterate the industry. I don't see recipe piracy affecting the regulatory sphere. The FDA hasn't mentioned a word about recipe piracy, nor have I seen any mainstream media articles on it. Battery safety is a far bigger issue than recipe theft. So while recipe theft is an in-house issue which the industry needs to confront, we also have far bigger publicly visible issues to resolve.

 

[zandernwn]

If you can't name and shame then you should not have added to this, What is the point of keeping your own contacts that act disgracefully all to yourself< This is a community, and awareness is all you can do with these 26 alphabet letters.

I will not give them anymore publisity than they deserve by announcing publicly. Any publicity is good publicity right. I will keep doing this face to face where I have control over how effective my message is recieved and I will go as far as selling them the original recipe at the cost of materials to anyone as alternative and shate he original recipe so they can do it themselves. That way they do not have to buy it.

Sent from my HUAWEI CRR-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[zandernwn]

But will you speak out against the people who put up clone receipes of commercial juices on DIY sub-forums and sites?

Those who know me from the many whatsapp groups I am involved in will tell you the same

Do I use them, of course I do. Do I clone them myself, yes I do. Do I believe that I am impacting vendors by doing so... no!!! You have diyers and juice buyers.... juice buyers do not mix and mixers do not buy.

So the amswer in short is I will share t in a closed group where I have a reasonable expectation that it will be used for personal use alone . Will I share it here or on any facebook page. No.

Will I share it if my gut feels tell me not to share it because thay person may use it wrongly... no.

You see, wether you believe me or not on the above is irrelevant. I live by the same ethics I preach. Many of the folks I interact with in a daily basis are on this forum too, I welcome anyone of them to call me out if I what I am saying here is false



Sent from my HUAWEI CRR-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Feliks Karp]

Do I use them, of course I do. Do I clone them myself, yes I do. Do I believe that I am impacting vendors by doing so... no!!!

And that is exactly the line of thinking some one takes when taking a "free" receipe and turning it in to business, "I'm not depriving the DIY person of income because he put it up for free, he never intended to make money off of it." Except in this case you are saying "I will mix up some analogue of that commercial juice, enjoy it and the juice maker won't lose any income because I never intended to buy it anyways". Really in all honesty after calling us out on being complacent your line of thinking is in direct contradiction to this quest of yours you claim to be on.

 

[Darryn Du Plessis]

Check recipe piracy of Cocktail drinks/ and see that recipes are forever recycled- People WILL always use the same recipe, because it's KNOWN to be great and they will name it their own variation to slip by less noticeably as a copy of //x,y, or z

Well, the stolen recipe thing isn't creating a nuisance for non-vapers. If I regale non-vapers at a party with stories of how Wayne's recipes are stolen, their eyes will glaze over. They don't care and why should they? It has absolutely no impact on their lives.

It's also not like vaping is the only industry where piracy or IP theft occur. Almost every industry is rife with it. So I don't see how it marks vaping as being different or less principled than any other industry.

On the issue of legislation, I think more of it would be a good thing. For example, I don't agree with vapers being sold batteries whose amperage rating is vastly over-stated by the manufacturer. So I think we do need more controls. The trick is ensure that legislation/regulation serve to protect the consumer, not to obliterate the industry. I don't see recipe piracy affecting the regulatory sphere. The FDA hasn't mentioned a word about recipe piracy, nor have I seen any mainstream media articles on it. Battery safety is a far bigger issue than recipe theft. So while recipe theft is an in-house issue which the industry needs to confront, we also have far bigger publicly visible issues to resolve.

 

[Andre]

And that is exactly the line of thinking some one takes when taking a "free" receipe and turning it in to business, "I'm not depriving the DIY person of income because he put it up for free, he never intended to make money off of it." Except in this case you are saying "I will mix up some analogue of that commercial juice, enjoy it and the juice maker won't lose any income because I never intended to buy it anyways". Really in all honesty after calling us out on being complacent your line of thinking is in direct contradiction to this quest of yours you claim to be on.

At last some sanity prevails.

I have done a few original recipes and a few interpretations/remixes/clones of commercial juices. As part of the DIY community I feel obliged to share them. If someone feels the need to use them for commercial purposes I do not mind at all - good luck with the venture for I chose not to do it. Why be part of a DIY community, but not share your recipes? Then you only take and not give or only give halfway?

 

[Darryn Du Plessis]

Just read an article for recipes":

CAN AND SHOULD YOU PROTECT YOUR RECIPES?

In a world of the internet, social networks and the culture of sharing can you really protect your recipes from being copied and, more importantly, should you

BY RYAN KING ON SEPTEMBER 07, 2012

In April 2012 FDL reported on the case of a Chicago bakery owner who threatened to sue her chef after she decided to leave the job, taking the company's secret recipe for Cinnamon Bombs with her.

The case brought up a number of questions about recipe ownership, culinary copyright and protecting ideas in the kitchen. Fortunately for the owner and chef, the case was settled out of court and the recipes returned. However, the question of how to protect recipes and whether a culinary form of copyright exists still remains.

Can a recipe be protected under current UK or European copyright laws? Could the creator of a dish protect their innovation using patent protection? Or should the tried and tested route of a heavily guarded trade secret style approach be adopted to protect culinary creations? With these questions in mind FDL spoke with a number of legal professionals to try and see what options, if any, are available for culinary copyright.

Copyright

Copyright works to protect the way a recipe is recorded in writing and not the way it is actually made. If you record and publish a recipe and someone then looks to re-copy that recipe without any new literary expression being added, this could be deemed as a copyright infringement. However, this does not stop someone taking the recipe, cooking it in their restaurant, changing the name and claiming it as their own.

Copyright protects certain categories of works including literary,dramatic and musical works. Assuming that a person creating a recipe has done so with a minimal level of skill and effort in making it original then in principle copyright can exist in a recipe as a literary piece of work. However, a chef in most cases is not looking to protect the written form but the end product. Andrew Charlesworth, a legal expert from Bristol University, explains one of the other major difficulties in culinary copyright, "The key problem for granting copyright protection to recipes is the issue of originality versus the ethos of cookery experimentation and development. While some recipes may be original in the sense of deriving wholly from the imagination of the chef/creator/author, the vast majority surely are not. Cookery as an art depends upon borrowing and tweaking and fusing the work of others in a way that is inimical to the application of Intellectual Property Rights meant for books music or dramatic works."

Patents

A Patent protects the process involved in production, a new method or technology that is harnessed during recipe creation. The London based law firm Briffa say, "It may be possible to protect a recipe by filing a patent if you have come up with a new method of doing something, but it must not be obvious. So, Heston Blumenthal's way of freezing things may possibly be patentable. Combining X, Y and Z to produce something new may be patentable too, however, putting known ingredients together with no new and inventive technical effect would not be patentable."

For example, Sarah Bazaraa, an IP Solicitor for the legal firm Pannone, presented FDL an interesting description of a well known dessert, "A composite confection product, which comprises a multiplicity (for example, at least four) of thin superimposed layers of extrudable aerated confection material...."

This is some of the patent that was filed and granted for Viennetta ice cream. Using patent laws the company was able to protect their recipe by patenting the process involved in the production of the dessert. A much stronger way of protecting a recipe than copyright, but one that Sarah explains does have certain drawbacks, "Patents only last 20-years and they are given in return for disclosing the process involved. After 20-years it's fair game and anyone can use your information provided in the patent application, this is why some companies like KFC and Coca Cola choose to take a different route in protecting their recipes."

Trade Secrets

Very few people know the Colonel's secret chicken recipe, even fewer know the hidden secrets of Coca-Cola's trademark flavor, however, none of these recipes are protected by patent or copyright law. In these cases KFC and Coca-Cola both make all employees who come into contact with the recipe sign non-disclosure agreements, in turn these people can then be taken to court and sued for damages or an account of profit if they decide to reveal the recipe. This is a difficult task to manage but may be the best option to take for people and companies who want try and protect recipes for longer than the 20-year protection a patent provides.

At least within the current US and European laws it seems there is no specific route for culinary intellectual property protection. There are a number of options but are they really the way to help the industry develop? If Heston Blumenthal had patented the process of producing Bacon and Egg ice cream, or Ferran Adria locked down the techniques of his wonderful parmesan foam, imagine how the food landscape would look. It might seem like a nice idea to protect a kitchen creation but this could be very detrimental to the industry.


The Future

It's unclear how much development there will be in the world of culinary copyright and as Sarah Bazaraa states, "There's not much debate at the minute surrounding this topic" but it is a field that could well change with technology. Sarah went on to tell FDL that it may be feasible in the 'not-too distant' future to protect scents and tastes using trademark laws subject to companies and the law finding an acceptable way for these to be "graphically represented." That's something FDL will discuss with Sarah in the next installment of Culinary Copyright as we also look to the chefs for their opinion and take a look at how the US system differs from those in place in the UK and Europe.



Big thanks to Sarah Bazaraa from Pannone, Andrew Charlesworth from Bristol University, Richard Homer of New Media Law in London and the Law Firm Briffa...

 

[Darryn Du Plessis]

At last some sanity prevails.

I have done a few original recipes and a few interpretations/remixes/clones of commercial juices. As part of the DIY community I feel obliged to share them. If someone feels the need to use them for commercial purposes I do not mind at all - good luck with the venture for I chose not to do it. Why be part of a DIY community, but not share your recipes? Then you only take and not give or only give halfway?

Thank You @Andre

 

[zandernwn]

At last some sanity prevails.

I have done a few original recipes and a few interpretations/remixes/clones of commercial juices. As part of the DIY community I feel obliged to share them. If someone feels the need to use them for commercial purposes I do not mind at all - good luck with the venture for I chose not to do it. Why be part of a DIY community, but not share your recipes? Then you only take and not give or only give halfway?

Now now! you are putting words in my mouth. You claim that I take and dont give back is completely unfounded and wrong.

Lets not go there.


Sent from my HUAWEI CRR-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Darryn Du Plessis]

Now now! you are putting words in my mouth. You claim that I take and dont give back is completely unfounded and wrong.

Lets not go there.


Sent from my HUAWEI CRR-L09 using Tapatalk

Yay okay, well just don't give out your secrets anymore, to the internet /communities that could potentially make riches from your ideas;

The internet doesn't have that many places you can do that - > so something hands on like this to make an extra few buckaroos on the side is pretty legitimate business

Oil makers.

 

[zandernwn]

Thank You @Andre

Before we start seeking bias affrirmation from each other, let first establish the facts shall we?

Please read my post again and then we can start this a fresh and work on what was acctually said.

Sent from my HUAWEI CRR-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[zandernwn]

mmm, I find myself disappointed at the notion that integrity has become so cheap. let me just be clear, I am not referring to the comments made by anyone on this thread, I would like my opinion to be respected and therefor I shall respect yours. Instead I speak to the zeitgeist of our times (if you will allow me to be philosophical for a moment here). What you guys are saying is true. whether your standpoints stem from being such a person who have no qualms with this practice or whether you are simply being realistic or whether you just discussing this without a dog in the fight.

Maybe I am old fashioned but I firmly believe that it is wrong. Above all I value my integrity and I for one will not be able to walk into a vape shop and sell a product that I know is not mine. There is no pride in that especially not in the interaction between the manufacturer and the vendor both turning a blind eye to this fact just to make a few extra bucks - I can't see myself steeping that low.

I concede that other that my ethical beliefs I can find no legal grounds that would prevent anyone from doing this unless they can demonstrate innovation as contemplated in the patent regulations . Recipes be it food, pharma or chemical are explicitly excluded from the copyright scope in most countries. I have read here on this thread that it seems a legal president has not yet been set in our courts in this regards but I doubt that any court would really rule in favor of my view should it ever happen.

But I will tell you what I can do, I can highlight the fact that those are stolen and provide information on where to find the original recipes to anyone who buys that juice. Will this have a dramatic impact on the sales of these products? No. Will evolve into a movement followed by all DIYers and start having an impact? No. Will these guys suddenly suffer damage; if any at all? probably not.

but what is the use of beliefs if we do not exercise our right to uphold it, right? so thats what I will do

 

[Andre]

Now now! you are putting words in my mouth. You claim that I take and dont give back is completely unfounded and wrong.
Lets not go there.

I was not even referring to you kind Sir, but if the shoe fits...And these words from your post do tend to fit unless I am interpreting it incorrectly: "I will no longer do this. I will gladly help answer specific questions and answer that question to the best of my ability but I will not share recipe again.".

 

[zandernwn]

The context of that reply seemed hostile and aimed at me. I must have misunderstood. all good.

Also helping the community is not confined to sharing recipes. I invest a considerable amount of my time and money in helping the DIY community...

 

[Silver]

Very interesting thread gents

Am following with interest

 

[Caveman]

So basically we have 2 things in question here. Morality and law. The law is unclear about this and therefore it is clear that public recipes are not protected. The morality issue is one of individualism. If you don't want to support a vendor when you can somehow prove they have stolen a free online recipe, then that onus rests on you and no one will think worse of you if you choose not to support them. Note I am not talking about using a well established brand name and riding on their coat tails. That's a different argument. Your best bet if you want to keep your recipes safe is to not share them at all, but then what's the point of being part of a DIY community? We are all about sharing here, if you develop a great recipe with input and help from other members, I am of the view that it should be shared. That begs the argument that @Andre made that if you have no intention of ever selling it, why not share it, if someone goes and makes money from it, who cares, you never had the intention. If you are making recipes to sell them, then don't share them.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

[Feliks Karp]

The context of that reply seemed hostile and aimed at me. I must have misunderstood. all good.

Also helping the community is not confined to sharing recipes. I invest a considerable amount of my time and money in helping the DIY community...

gott in hemmel

So you are saying that you will never use anyone elses receipes so long as you no longer share your own? If not then absolutely no one has made any incorrect assumptions.
You came in here with what I would admit is decent intent, but then ramp up in complete over-drive because people didn't get whipped up in to a rabid frenzy to join you on your crusade. You further go on to compare us to being complacent in "criminal" activities even trying to loosely associate our beliefs and input with an almost reverse broken-window theory. You then go on to accuse some members as being part of this underbelly of juice makers simply because they disagree with you. You then make several contradictory statements and end off with a self-righteous speech insinuating that we're all perhaps amoral and you will just continue the good fight on your own. Maybe you should get off of the soapboxes you've balanced on your high horse, come down to the ground and meet the rest of us, perhaps you will then understand subscribing to logic and reality leaves you with some (perhaps unfortunate) truths.

 

[Caveman]

gott in hemmel

So you are saying that you will never use anyone elses receipes so long as you no longer share your own? If not then absolutely no one has made any incorrect assumptions.
You came in here with what I would admit is decent intent, but then ramp up in complete over-drive because people didn't get whipped up in to a rabid frenzy to join you on your crusade. You further go on to compare us to being complacent in "criminal" activities even trying to loosely associate our beliefs and input with an almost reverse broken-window theory. You then go on to accuse some members as being part of this underbelly of juice makers simply because they disagree with you. You then make several contradictory statements and end off with a self-righteous speech insinuating that we're all perhaps amoral and you will just continue the good fight on your own. Maybe you should get off of the soapboxes you've balanced on your high horse, come down to the ground and meet the rest of us, perhaps you will then understand subscribing to logic and reality leaves you with some (perhaps unfortunate) truths.

I'll throw in a brilliant soap recipe I've got, free of charge.

Disclaimer: it contains LOCO Blueberry
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

[rogue zombie]

But will you speak out against the people who put up clone receipes of commercial juices on DIY sub-forums and sites?

No. Leave those people alone

 

[RichJB]

So basically we have 2 things in question here. Morality and law.

I would add a third, pursuant to the sub-discussion between @zandernwn and @Andre: personal priorities. If I'm concluding correctly, @zandernwn's highest priority is that nobody should profit unethically from his work, that trumps the pleasure/reward of sharing his recipes. @Andre's highest priority is the pleasure/reward of sharing his recipes, people profiting unethically from his work is a lower priority for him.

I don't think it's a case of right or wrong, both sets of priorities are equally valid. It's a case of each individual making the choice that works for them.

 

[zandernwn]

And that is exactly the line of thinking some one takes when taking a "free" recipe and turning it in to business, "I'm not depriving the DIY person of income because he put it up for free, he never intended to make money off of it." Except in this case you are saying "I will mix up some analogue of that commercial juice, enjoy it and the juice maker won't lose any income because I never intended to buy it anyways". Really in all honesty after calling us out on being complacent your line of thinking is in direct contradiction to this quest of yours you claim to be on.

I am not even sure how you equate those two to be the same but let me tell you a story of a very exciting juice line that is about to launch. It started as a shared recipe, everyone loved it so much that we encouraged the creator to commercialise it. nobody shared this recipe beyond that group out of respect and we afforded the creator chance to pursue taking it to market.

The creator never intended this to be a commercial line, he created an awesome recipe to help the community - this turned into an opportunity to make something great out of that.

The creator received a fair chance at getting rewarded for his efforts. Now you want to tell me somehow we have double standards and that we are guilty of acting unethically? Close to 20 DIYers have access to the exact recipe of this juice. not a single person have shared this, not a single person have tried to steal it. chances are very good that none of the 20 odd folks that have access to it will ever physically go and buy that juice in the shops because we can just mix it up ourselves. bt we will also not cause the recipe creator harm by sharing beyond that group. That my friend is integrity, that is ethical.

Now you want to come and tell me that somehow I have no more integrity that the person stealing the recipes... try the other one.

there are plenty of recipe on line that are shared as on a free to use for whatever purpose, why are the not choosing those?

you can read more about the types of licensing that can be applied by the creator
https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-types-examples/

and here: https://creativecommons.org/faq/#do...o-copyright-such-as-fair-dealing-and-fair-use

last comment, the person who stole that recipe will soon have to compete with the creator of these recipes directly as he and other of the top mixers are bringing their juice lines to south africa.

 

[zandernwn]

I would add a third, pursuant to the sub-discussion between @zandernwn and @Andre: personal priorities. If I'm concluding correctly, @zandernwn's highest priority is that nobody should profit unethically from his work, that trumps the pleasure/reward of sharing his recipes. @Andre's highest priority is the pleasure/reward of sharing his recipes, people profiting unethically from his work is a lower priority for him.

I don't think it's a case of right or wrong, both sets of priorities are equally valid. It's a case of each individual making the choice that works for them.

thats a fair point

 

[E.T.]

 

[zandernwn]

Popcorn aside, the one thing lacking from this debate is the admission from a guitly prominent juice maker that they have used recipes they took online and defending their case. why is that?

Sent from my HUAWEI CRR-L09 using Tapatalk