slkinsey

Well, here's the thing about IP rights: they apply to everyone irrespective of perceived "level." Danielle Steel's copyrights -- or mine for that matter -- are just as valid as Philip Roth's.

Very well stated, Pedro. Makes some good sense.

At the risk of offending the core audience in these forums, I'm not sure I'd classify cooking in the same category as composing a symphony, writing a novel, directing a movie or creating a sculpture. One might conceivably equate cooking with an interpretive art such as a musician actually executing a composition, or an actor actually performing a role. But those interpretations have zero protection, only recordings of those interpretations have protection (and only in the US, for that matter). If someone performs the role of Othello and substantially imitates Laurence Olivier's interpretation, there are many ways this might be viewed -- but "plagiariam" isn't one of them. Personally, I am more inclined to equate cookng with building a really amazing chest of drawers than I am composing an opera, which is to say high artifice rather than high art. Needless to say, there are a few notable exceptions.

This is kind of sad, I think. Where is the joy in that? Where is the pride? Where is the intellectual stimulation?

Here's the question I have about this whole thing: Who says that when you walk into a restaurant and are served a certain dish that there is an inherent expectation that the dish is wholly original to the chef of that particular restaurant, from recipe to execution to plating? Where is this line drawn? Why does there seem to be the belief these principles are somehow correctly applied to lobster skewered on an injection bulb and not to, for example, the pizza-making process developed at Otto?

In re to using live cultures of liquid yeast, one way to really kick off the fermentation is to brew a small "pitching batch" a few days before so you can grow up some extra yeast (Chris may be planning on explaining this later). This is easy to do, since you don't really care about the taste: smack the pack & when it is inflated, boil some malt powder (maybe with a few pellets of hops) with maybe a quart of water, decant it into a sanitized glass bottle and chill, pitch the yeast and put on an airlock. In a day or two, the yeast will have fermented the liquid into "beer." What's more important is that the population of yeast cells you have on hand will have radically increased. While you're boiling your wort, etc. just put the bottle in the refrigerator so most of the yeast goes temporarily dormant and sinks to the bottom of the bottle. Decant off most of the liquid, and when it is time to pitch the yeast for your actual batch of beer just swirl the bottle to stir up the yeast and pour it into your fermenter.

I really don't have a lot of respect for this kind of attitude. I've seen the bartenders at Flatiron Lounge bang out one labor intensive specialty cocktail after another while completely slammed on a weekend night. That said, I can understand that it may be a pain in the butt to make things like a Martini or a Manhattan that have a high probability of generating complaints due to the fact that there are so many different ideas about how they are made. For example, I know of bartenders at locations where the "super extra dry" Martini is in vogue who simply don't bother using any vermouth at all -- and yet a few people will still try to return one every night because it's "not dry enough."

Yes, a vrey nice place but, as Ed points out, not exactly bargained price. Unless one is inclined to mortgage the house and buy one of the (impresive looking) tiered seafood platters, I think other places offer similar quality for a better price. The strip steaks I've had at Landmarc, for example, have been better than the one I had at Sascha, which was a little tight in texture for my taste -- and while Landmarc's frites don't hold a candle to the gargantuan pile of fried potato that came with my steak at Sascha, I'm not sure those frites are enough to justify a five dollar price difference. All that said, if I lived of worked in the area, I could see myself dropping into the downstairs Gansevoort Room from time to time for a burger and some of those delicious frites. The cocktail list also contains some interesting concoctions worth trying, although perhaps a bit on the sweet side for my palate.

Re the simple syrup information... When we mix one cup of sugar with one cup of water, we do not end up with two cups of simple syrup. We actually end up with quite a bit less. According to the Mixologist article, 1:1 simple syrup has around 17.7 grams of sugar per fluid ounce. Since a teaspoon of granulated sugar weighs 4 grams, this comes to 4.4 teaspoons per fluid ounce. Working from that, Gary's Daiquiri recipe has 2 ounces rum, one ounce lime juice and 2.2 teaspoons of sugar. Dave's Daiquiri recipe has 2 ounces of rum, a half ounce of fresh line juice and 1 teaspoon of sugar. Gary's recipe has double the lime juice and, as a result, it has approximately double the sugar to balance the sourness. In either case, the sugar will be tweaked depending on the sweetness of the lime. Whether one prefers one version or the other will largely be a matter of preference, and beyond that may depend on the character of the rum one is using.

Looks delicious! Ah Leung, one small suggestion on opening an oyster: The technique for opening an oyster and opening a clam are the opposite. When you open a clam, you slide the knife in between the shells at the side where the shell comes open, and work the knife back towards the hinge severing the muscles. With an oyster, you stick the point of the knife down in between the two shells at the hinge, and then pop the two shells apart using the knife as a lever. http://www.jacquespepin.net/members/techni...openoyster.html

This brings up an interesting point. Not everyone would necessarily be pleased to be formally credited for derivative or imitative dishes. I could see an instance where a restaurant was serving a dish that credits another chef, and the credited chef might not be too happy about it. He might assert that the second restaurant was making money using his name without permission, or that the reproduced dish was not faithful to the original or up to the standards of the original. Indeed, I imagine that this sort of complaint would be commonplace. From the chefs' perspective, I wonder if it is the case that they would like to be given credit where due, or if perhaps it is more the case that they simply wouldn't want anyone else making those dishes or working with those ideas but themselves.

Let us suppose for a moment that it were possible to collect royalties and mandate citations for substantially derivative "culinary works." Does everyone agree that this is a good thing? Where would we draw the line? The example I made above of the "fried onion flower" seems roughly analogous to copying Dufresne's prawn pasta. Do we agree that they are equally worthy of such ethical (and perhaps legal) consideration? Do we agree that the culinary world would be better if all restaurants serving a knockoff of JGV's molten chocolate cake had to pay a royalty and credit JGV on their menus? What level of imitation is acceptable and what is not? Do we agree that every uncredited food item on a menu is inherently claimed as an exclusive creation of that chef? Why do we feel that prawn noodles are worthy of such consideration, and yet luxe hamburgers with truffles and foie gras, or onions deep fried in a certain way are not?

Andy, that's a copyright issue. You can copyright the recording of an idea (be that on paper or tape) but you can't copyright the idea, or even necessarily the expression of the idea.

This is an interesting topic, Kent. On the one hand, it is sad in a way for certain cultural traditions and foods to be lost when families immigrate. On the other hand, to a large extent, the ultimate success of immigrants in their new country is dependent upon their success at integrating with the predominant and successful culture in that country. Cultures that have a history of great success in America have typically placed a high value on such integration, wanting their children to grow up as Americans and not as "Chinese (or whatever) living in America." My observation has been that it is not at all uncommon for first generation immigrant parents to deliberately emphasize American culinary customs and the English language, in the belief that it will help their children succeed here. This belief, I think, is one that is largely supported by empirical evidence. People from Asian cultures, in particular, seem to practice this upon immigration to the United States, and considering how widely different these cultures are from American culture, I have to believe that it has something to do with their remarkable success here. I can't say I'd do any differently. If I had a family and we were to immigrate to Italy, I would want my children to be Italians. I would emphasize Italian language skills over English, and Italian culinary traditions over American. This is not to say that I wouldn't still try to preserve some traditions (Thanksgiving, for example). But the reality is that most of our "American-ness" would be lost by the third generation anyway.

Well, first of all you're crazy if you think musicians receive royalties every time their recordings are sold or played in a commercial venue. There are several "bootleg" recordings of operas in which I performed a role available for sale, and I have never received a dime nor was my permission ever sought. Anyway, I digress. . . The main problem with your comparison is that the two examples are not similar. A recording is a preserved example of the artist's work from the artist's own instrument. A recipe or conception is not. Now, if Vongerichten's staff were baking molten chocolate cakes in the kitchens of Jean-Georges and shipping them to various restaurants to be served, then we would have analogous examples. In that instance, I agree that it would make ethical sense for the restaurants to give credit to JGV. I should point out, in case it is not clear, that I am playing Devil's Advocate here a bit. I do agree that there is a level of imitation that, in certain situations, necessitates credit. But there is some question in my mind as to where those levels lie, and whether we are guilty of a bit of conceit in applying these ideas so vehemently to this particular style of cuisine because the chefs style themselves "conceptual artists" working in a culinary medium. Most people would agree that Daniel Boulud's db Bistro Moderne conceived (or brought to prominence) the idea of the "luxe haute hamburger." This, like the molten chocolate cake, has become a culinary meme, although not as strong as the cake meme. So. . . should Boulud receive credit, perhaps even a royalty, every time another restaurant serves a super-expensive hamburger with truffles and foie gras? At what degree of difference in execution does another restaurant's ethical obligation to Boulud cease? Or let's take it even further. . . what about the guy and the restaurant that came up with the widely imitated idea of a large mild onion cut on a special cutter, battered and deep fried so it comes out in the shape of a flower (e.g., the "Bloomin' Onion" at Outback Steakhouse)? Should every restaurant serving this preparation credit the originator? If not, then why not? Why is this idea any less worthy of such stringent ethical consideration than the dishes from Alinea, Moto, wd-50, etc? Could part of it be that the chefs at these restaurants are holding themselves up (or being held up by others, anyway) as "high culture creative artists" an their food as "conceptual art" while the guy who invented the fried onion thing is not? I should point out, by the way, that lowbrow pop musicians get paid royalties just the same as highbrow classical musicians, and in fact are much more likely to receive such compensation.

Okay. But still, the "chocolate cake with molten center" idea was conceived by Bras, and Vongerichten's iteration would seem to be derivative. At what point of "copying" do we draw the line? For that matter, "chocolate cake with molten center" has obviously become quite the culinary meme -- perhaps due more to Vongerichten's version than Bras's -- and yet one doesn't see any menus crediting either one, despite the fact that most versions are more or less straightforward imitations of the dessert from Jean-Georges.

I'm interested to hear thoughts on this one... The first job I ever had as a kid was working at a bakery in the Boston area. I can remember that one of our most popular cookies was something involving a lot of nuts that was baked all in one piece and then punched out with a cutter. The baker had learned the recipe at another bakery, that had conceived the recipe. Should our signage have credited the "inventor" of the cookies? Or, for that matter, what about "cookies & cream" ice cream? Should everyone making that credit Emack & Bolio's? There is some difference, in my mind, between saying "I conceived this" when you did not, and simply not saying anything about who conveived something.

That one line seems a bit taken out of context to me. It conveys an altogether different feeling here:

Well said, chef. I'd like to think that this discussion is about a lot more than the individual example that started it. It's not about assigning blame or levels of blame to one chef or one restaurant. It's about exploring some ideas and concepts, and how they relate to the restaurant and food world.

I'm not so sure I agree with the premise that reproducing something substantially inspired by, or even borrowed wholesale from another person without attribution necessarily constitutes plagiarism irrespective of the medium and the standards which are commonly accepted to apply to that medium. Clearly, for example, we don't feel that one has an ethical obligation to credit Escoffier or whoever when making a dish with one of his classic sauces. In the music world, there is definitely a distinction made between a creative act and an interpretive act. If someone substantially copies a song, they are guilty of plagiarism (and copyright violation, for that matter). However, suppose I copy someone's interpretation? For example, Giuseppe di Stefano was famous for taking the high C at the end of the Faust aria in full voice and then doing a long sustained decrescendo to pianissimo. Does this mean that I'm a plagiarist if I do the same thing without holding up a little sign saying, "this decrescendo originally conceived and performed by Giuseppe di Stefano?" Of course not. That would be ridiculous. Sizzleteeth makes an interesting and similar point about the meat enzyme. Is the idea of using the enzyme to make pasta out of meat a creative act or an interpretive act? Is everyone who does this ethically bound to clearly credit the inspiration to Dufresne (or whoever)? I think there is an argument to be made that taking an enzyme that was designed (by someone else) and used (by lots of people and companies) to stick meat together, and using that enzyme to create noodles out of meat is an interpretive rather than creative act. As such, I'm not convinced it's something that can be plagiarized, per se. If many or most of the interpretive elements that went into the dish are substantially copied, I would say that that makes the derivative work not very inspired -- just as I would find it uninteresting were a soprano to slavishly imitate Maria Callas's interpretation of Violetta in La Traviata. But I'm not sure I'd call either one plagiarism. Different ideas and different standards apply in different fields and disciplines. In the music and food worlds, I think there is a built-in assumption that interpretive works are substantially influenced by and built upon what has come before, and that no work is entirely original in either conception or execution. Certainly, even in a restaurant like ADNY or Per Se or wd-50, I wouldn't necessarily have the expectation that every dish has been created out of thin air by the chef. And clearly certain dishes and ideas reach a certain level of ubiquity where no one feels that they need credit anyone. Are all the restaurants in NYC serving "crudo" giving credit to Pasternack at Esca?

That is, in my experience, the way the word is commonly used in NYC. A "bagel with cream cheese" often seems to have a half inch thick layer of cream cheese, whereas a "bagel with a schmear" has just the small amount that can be spread with a swipe of the knife. Going further into bagel terminology, there was a funny bit in the NYT Metropolitan Diary a week or two ago. A customer was standing in line for a bagel at a place near the UN, and heard someone ordering a "Kofi Annan bagel." It is not uncommon here for sandwiches and the like to be named after prominent figures, so the customer figured it might be the Secretary-General's favorite bagel preparation. Since the place was so close to the UN, perhaps he was a regular there. Maybe it featured some ingredient from Ghana? Upon reaching the counter the customer inquired as to "what constitutes a 'Kofi Annan bagel.'" The counterman replied, "the same thing it always constitutes -- a coffee and a bagel."

It appears to be temporarily offline. Try: http://groups.msn.com/drinkboy

I was surprised that France, Greece, Italy and Spain were not listed as members, but a visit to the websited confirmed that theyare indeed members - founding members, in fact. France, Greece, Italy and Spain are all part of the EU, so there is no reason to list them individually. The EU didn't exist when the IOOC was founded, which is why individual EU countries are listed as founding members. For the record, the EU includes Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. These are all member countries of the IOOC by virtue of being in the European Union. Reading further on the IOOC site, I see the following that refers to the international legal underpinning of the IOOC's various specifications (referringm in this instance, to the original agreement of 1956): "Like all the international commodity agreements, it was legally underpinned by the principles recommended by the United Nations Economic and Social Council and embodied in chapter VI of the Havana Charter." Unfortunately, as far as I am able to tell, observers are only that: countries that send delegates to observe the sessions of the Council. As nonmembers, they are not bound by the agreement. Is there something special that differentiates a grove from some other type of stand of olive trees? I ask that because I thought that a lot of olives were grown in California. Is that untrue? The most recent official statistics I was able to find were for 2002, when they harvested 103,000 tons of California olives (66,300 Manzanillo, 23,500 Sevillano, and 11,500 other. They estimated that only around 10,000 tons were used for "olive oil and other specialty products." Oil yield can vary widely depending on the variety of olive and method of cultivation, from ten gallons of oil per ton of "green over-watered Sevillano" to fifty-five gallons of oil per ton of "very ripe, deficit-irrigated Mission, Picual" (source). In 2004 there were 383,000 gallons of California olive oil produced, constituting 99% of US olive oil production and <0.1% of worldwide olive oil production (source).

I would guess that "substiantial processing" is pretty broad. Certainly it would include things like pressing the actual olives into oil. But it could also include things like blending, which is likely to happen at any level, and filtering, etc. Although the US is not a member of the IOOC and as a US company can therefore label the oil however they like for sale in the US, I note that their bottles do not say "Italian" or "Tunisian" (or wherever) olive oil. According to my interpretation of the IOOC specifications, these oils would have the United States as the country of origin if they are blended, etc. in the US. But again, since the US is not a member, US olive oil companies don't have to worry about any of that stuff. This makes sense, given the UK law, don't you think?

I sent an email to the IOOC. We'll see if I hear back, and if so, what they say.