Barefoot Contessa Cupcakes

I made the Barefoot Contessa coconut cupcakes this weekend with the Stone-Buhr flour Josh sent.  They flew off the plate at my birthday party.  I noticed something interesting while looking for the recipe online, that reminded me of the Creative Commons license.

Someone posted the recipe on their blog, changed the amount of one ingredient, and didn't credit the Barefoot Contessa, Ina Garten.  Someone anonymous consequently wrote in the comments section, "This looks just like the recipe from the Barefoot Contessa, except she uses 3/4 cup buttermilk and cooks them differently" -- the commenter then proceeds to explain the cooking method given in the cookbook.

I also noticed some places where individuals had posted the recipe, and it had been taken down.  I wondered whether they had been asked to remove it by the Barefoot Contessa's company.  Probably not, but it wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility for a company to ask customers to stop spreading the word about how much they love their product (free advertising!).  The Barefoot Contessa's website wisely does not feature all their recipes, just a selection.  The idea is you will discover one you like, and buy the book to get the rest.

The thing that really interested me is that people don't see posting Garten's recipe as dishonest.  Making the recipe "open source" is more of a compliment, and bakers  are likely to perceive accessing the recipe for free as a right (even though the proprietor may prefer to "own" the "intellectual property").

What's publicly recognized as dishonest, though, is listing the recipe as if it was your own, and not giving credit where credit is due.  If you try it, eventually, a fellow netizen is going to call you on it.  "That's not yours, it's the Barefoot Contessa's."  That's why all the Creative Commons licenses start with "Attribution" as the essential copyright.

To learn more about Creative Commons licensing for your intellectual property, check out their site.  (The frosting recipe is included here).

Comments

[Russell Nelson]

Something which is functional is not suitable for copyright protection. If there is only one way to express something, then even though its value may have been recognized by one person and publicized by them, it cannot be copyrighted. The *expression* of a recipe can be copyrighted, e. g. the way cooking instructions are written. However, the quantities are not subject to copyright protection.

Not everything which is the result of human creativity needs legal protection. After all, a copyright is a subsidy. Is there any shortage of recipes that they need federal protection?