Showing posts with label cultural appropriation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cultural appropriation. Show all posts

Friday, December 3, 2021

Who Owns a Recipe? A Plagiarism Claim Has Cookbook Authors Asking.; The New York Times, November 29, 2021

Priya Krishna , The New York Times; Who Owns a Recipe? A Plagiarism Claim Has Cookbook Authors Asking.

U.S. copyright law protects all kinds of creative material, but recipe creators are mostly powerless in an age and a business that are all about sharing.

"U.S. copyright law seeks to protect “original works of authorship” by barring unauthorized copying of all kinds of creative material: sheet music, poetry, architectural works, paintings and even computer software.

But recipes are much harder to protect. This is a reason they frequently reappear, often word for word, in one book or blog after another.

Cookbook writers who believe that their work has been plagiarized have few options beyond confronting the offender or airing their grievances online. “It is more of an ethical issue than it is a legal issue,” said Lynn Oberlander, a media lawyer in New York City...

“The whole history of American cookbook publishing is based on borrowing and sharing,” said Bonnie Slotnick, the owner of Bonnie Slotnick Cookbooks, an antique bookstore in the East Village of Manhattan...

Mr. Bailey said many cookbook authors are used to the free exchange of ideas on social media, and may not be conscious of the importance of giving credit. “It has become so tempting in this environment to just take rather than to create,” he said."

Thursday, September 12, 2019

Māori anger as Air New Zealand seeks to trademark 'Kia Ora' logo; The Guardian, September 12, 2019

Eleanor Ainge Roy, The Guardian; Māori anger as Air New Zealand seeks to trademark 'Kia Ora' logo

"New Zealand’s national carrier, Air New Zealand, has offended the country’s Māori people by attempting to trademark an image of the words “kia ora”; the greeting for hello."

Saturday, December 22, 2018

Hakuna Matata™? Can Disney Actually Trademark That?; The New York Times, December 20, 2018

Kimiko de Freytas-Tamura, The New York Times; Hakuna Matata™? Can Disney Actually Trademark That?

"Trademark experts said the talk of colonialism and robbery was overwrought, and that the trademarking of phrases, particularly those from other languages, is commonplace.

“People talk about appropriation,” said Phillip Johnson, a professor of commercial law at Cardiff Law School in Wales and a specialist on intellectual property law, “but a trademark is all about appropriation of language within a narrow commercial sphere, outside that space people are free to use the language as they wish.”

“What’s difficult about this case is whether it was a sensible commercial decision for the Disney brand, rather than whether, legally, the mark should or should not be registered,” he added. “The question is, does their brand benefit from having trademark or does it get damaged from bad publicity from having that trademark?”"

Wednesday, December 12, 2018

Indigenous Knowledge Misappropriation: The Case Of The Zia Sun Symbol Explained At WIPO; Intellectual Property Watch, December 11, 2018

Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch; Indigenous Knowledge Misappropriation: The Case Of The Zia Sun Symbol Explained At WIPO

"The three panellists mentioned the importance of the United Nations Declarations on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [pdf], and in particular Article 31, which asserts the right of indigenous peoples to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, TK and TCEs,  and the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over their cultural heritage, TK, and TCEs.

Commenting on the Zia case, June Lorenzo, a lawyer advocating in tribal and domestic courts and legislative and international human rights bodies, said in the late 1890s, Zia was at a very vulnerable point, as many other tribes were. A number of archaeologists came and took “what they could because they thought we were going to disappear as a civilisation,” she said, noting that the stolen pot was repatriated in 2000 or 2002.

In 1925, when the Zia symbol was adopted by the state of New Mexico, the Zia were not even considered as citizens of the United States, she said, and could not vote. “So the idea that they should have objected to this [ the use of the symbol] in 1925 … is just absurd.”"

Tuesday, July 31, 2018

A Midwestern chain told Hawaiians to stop using ‘Aloha’ with ‘Poke,’ igniting a heated debate; The Washington Post, July 30, 2018

; A Midwestern chain told Hawaiians to stop using ‘Aloha’ with ‘Poke,’ igniting a heated debate

"The lawyers with the firm represented a company from the city, the Aloha Poke Co., that had jumped on one of the latest food trends — selling the Hawaiian staple poke, made from raw marinated ahi tuna — in 2016 and quickly expanded their reach to more than a dozen locations in Chicago and cities such as Milwaukee, Denver, and Washington, D.C.

[Jeffrey] Sampson also operated a poke shop, a luncheonette of 20 seats that he had opened with three friends in downtown Honolulu that shared little in common with the Chicago chain besides the dish and, coincidentally or not, given the commonality of the Hawaiian word, the name. When Sampson and friends opened the luncheonette about a year and a half ago, they had named it the Aloha Poke Shop, using the traditional Hawaiian greeting and word of welcoming.

Now the lawyers, with the firm Olson and Cepuritis, Ltd., were demanding that he change the business’s name, website, logo and materials to cease using the words “Aloha” and “Aloha Poke” immediately...

In a statement posted on social media, the company said that it had two federal trademarks for its logo and the words “Aloha Poke,” for any use connected to restaurants, catering and take out. It took aim at what it said was misinformation being spread about its intent, and said it was only trying to stop “trademark infringers” in the restaurant industry who used the words “aloha” and “poke” in conjunction with one another."

Sunday, November 20, 2016

Urban Outfitters settles with Navajo Nation after illegally using tribe's name; Guardian, 11/18/16

Nicky Woolf, Guardian; Urban Outfitters settles with Navajo Nation after illegally using tribe's name:
"Urban Outfitters reached a settlement with the Navajo Nation after illegally using the tribe’s name for a collection that included “Navajo hipster panties” and a “Navajo print flask”.
The lawsuit was brought against the fashion company in 2012, though it had used the name since 2001...
The tribe registered the name Navajo as a trademark in 1943, according to court documents."