...
"Recipe to Riches" Sleazy Ripoff or Opportunity?
Mon, 2011-02-21 12:02
#1
"Recipe to Riches" Sleazy Ripoff or Opportunity?
Mon, 2011-02-21 12:14
#2
A friend suggested I check out the Food Network Contest, "Recipe to Riches" because I have created a compeletely unique frozen treat that is dairy and gluten free. What I discovered is that for the "opportunity" of entering the contest you must reveal in entirety your ingredients and the process you use to create the product and in doing so you surrender all rights in perpetuity to it. They have the perfect right to use your recipe after you haven't won and make money from it.
To my way of thinking a fair contest would be entering products and revealing ingredients only if someone was sensitive to certain ingredients and the winning decision being based on taste. I do appreciate that if the end result will be a product on store shelves then they must have some sense of the difficulty to reproduce it but this could be addressed in different ways such as a request for the number of ingredients and the makes estimate of time to make it.
http://www.recipetoriches.ca/rules
What do you think?
Mon, 2011-02-21 12:30
#3
I may misundertand this, but I think that if you make a product that everyone loves, you cannot patent or otherwise restrict the use of it.
Anyone can figure out how you made it. Super unique only means the trial and error would take a BIT longer. In fact, even if you told them everything, they's still experiment with making it more attractive and/or cheaper to produce.
So I dont think you would be giving up anything you would not lose anyway.
I wouldnt be too surprised if they are trying to make this reality more explicit to save them grief later... especially since someone could argue that the solicitation of recipes make it different if they end up using your suggestion. Something like that.
I dont have any great ideas to lose, so maybe it would be different. But I dont think you have anything to lose. The most you could ever do with a unique recipe idea is successfully sell stuff at your local market. And you would still be able to do that even if someone took your idea national. Different market really.
By the way- a friend brought us some beautiful desserts from the Farmers Markets. I was so looking forward to diving in. And they are well, um, rather tasteless. Way too healthy for my tastes- and I'm not a big fan of really sweet stuff. Nobody in the family was enthusiastic, and I dont even want my share of the next round.
Mon, 2011-02-21 12:41
#4
You are correct that you cannot patent recipes and so that makes it a bit odd that they include that in their application but as to whether others can figure out your recipe by taste I would have to disagree with you on that. I have created a number of new frozen treats, one with butternut squash that over a hundred people tasted and nobody figured it out.
I entered a food contest a couple of years ago and our ingredients were not a required part of the application nor was there any mention of the contest holders having rights in perpetuity for out entries for the "opportunity" of entering.
Mon, 2011-02-21 13:25
#5
What individuals can figure out, and what even a very basic kitchen/lab can figure out are two very different things. Quick work to identify the ingredients, and some modest trial and error to replicate the process.
Contests you have been in are not the same as a national media event and whatever lies behind that. Like I said, even if people cannot generally claim rights to a food idea, I can see how lawyers looking at a high profile solicitation of recipres would want to eliminate the chance of lawsuits.... even if the backers were not in this to be able to use as many recipes as they want.
Mon, 2011-02-21 13:31
#6
I'm not in this to argue whether they should do this or it is or isnt sleazy.
You asked for opinions. I'm offering one that as well as the motives you suspect, there is simply that they want to protect themselves: that even though you could not normally sue a a company that used your recipe, without some kind of written caveat/warning a particpant could sue that they were fraudulently lured into giving up their ideas. And it could happen even if the company that used the idea of the contestant had no obvious connection to the Food Network.
Mon, 2011-02-21 14:00
#7
It is their contest and they can make the rules but in my view the rules are stacked entirely in their favour. The following statement sums up what you are saying I think:
"If Applicant considers their Recipe a trade secret or otherwise wishes to keep their Recipe or any ingredient, element or idea therein confidential they should not participate in this Competition or submit a Recipe. By submitting a Recipe in connection with the Competition, Applicants acknowledge and agree that such submission constitutes public disclosure of the Recipe. There is no obligation of confidentiality or fiduciary duty to any Applicant by any Competition Entity in respect of the Recipe submitted by an Applicant. A third party, including, without limitation, any Competition Entity may reproduce, display, publish, exhibit, develop, manufacture, market, sell or distribute a recipe or product which is or may appear similar or identical to Applicant's Recipe or any elements or ideas contained therein. Applicant understands and agrees that such third party and Competition Entity has an independent legal right to do so."
WWW.recipetoriches.ca/rules
Mon, 2011-02-21 14:12
#8
Timebandit
When I submit a funding proposal to a broadcaster, I usually have to sign a release indemnifying them should they release a project that is similar to mine, but not produced with me.
That's not because they're going to steal my idea - there are often similar projects submitted and they may choose one over the other based on team, experience, etc. It's unusual for an idea to be completely unique, and they are covering their butts.
I suspect the Food Network's reasons for asking for this release are similar.
Mon, 2011-02-21 14:12
#9
"Stacked"? To what purpose?
That looks like exactly the kind of wide ranging legal protection I suggested may be the purpose. They are covering their ass from what might arise merely by putting on the contest. In other words, this is the kind of protection you think you would need even if you have no purpose at all other than holding the contest and thereby promoting your show/network/whatever it is. That you would put this language in even if you explicitly had no interest in even the possibility of developing a contestants product.
Tue, 2011-02-22 11:59
#10
When I submit a funding proposal to a broadcaster, I usually have to sign a release indemnifying them should they release a project that is similar to mine, but not produced with me.
That's not because they're going to steal my idea - there are often similar projects submitted and they may choose one over the other based on team, experience, etc. It's unusual for an idea to be completely unique, and they are covering their butts.
I suspect the Food Network's reasons for asking for this release are similar.
I would see it differently, when you are submitting a proposal you are submitting an idea not a product. It would be like a contest for film makers in which you submit the film and for the opportunity of submitting the film you give up all rights to it. This contest is not asking for ideas for a new food it is asking for products.
Tue, 2011-02-22 19:59
#11
You asked what we think.
I dont think you should make a submission.
Tue, 2011-02-22 23:14
#12
Timebandit
I'm not saying it's exactly the same, ennir, but there are some similarities in that a recipe and an idea for a tv program are both intellectual property, so some of the same legal language and practices apply. If I base a show, for example, on a written work, I have to acquire rights to that work. Usually money changes hands, but it doesn't have to - or a token amount is given for an "option" where I try to raise the production funding, the full amount paid only if the project gets made. (Wins the contest? Well, sort of... It's a competition, sure enough.)
In a sense, your product is also an idea. Your intellectual property is not the frozen treat - it's the ingredients, method and presentation that you came up with.
I think that, even for the purposes of releasing information to judges for the purpose of the contest, the Food Network has to have agreement of the recipe's originator, and rather than go through several iterations of release, they just do the boilerplate and cover all the bases at once.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that this is pretty standard practice for contests of any kind where intellectual property is part of the program, and for intellectual property releases. If you're uncomfortable with the terms, though, you shouldn't enter.
ETA: Food Network and Temple Street Productions are both pretty reputable outfits. The release issues I'm talking about are even more relevant than I thought because the contest looks like it will be televised. It would not be worth their while to steal your recipe to make money off it - there's a lot more in the broadcast licenses and ad revenues, and a lawsuit would stop such a program in its tracks whether it had merit or not.
Wed, 2011-02-23 11:58
#13
Thank you for your response Timebandit. I disagree, I have spent over a hundred hours experimenting with ingredients and I have not only intellectual property but also a product.
It is a product that I explored bringing to market and then learned that Loblaw's employs scouts to find new and unique products in out of the way places, then they buy them, analyze them and reproduce it without any pesky recompense to those who created it in the first place.
KenS, I think it was pretty obvious that I have no intention of entering but thanks for your feedback.
Wed, 2011-02-23 14:57
#14
Timebandit
Thank you for your response Timebandit. I disagree, I have spent over a hundred hours experimenting with ingredients and I have not only intellectual property but also a product.
Okay, but I have a product, too, after hundreds of hours of work - it's the finished program. That's still categorized as intellectual rather than physical property - although the physical property (ie: dvds) sold without my okay infringes my intellectual property rights. Again, not totally the same, but not dissimilar.
Hope you find a market to benefit from your work! 