Discussions about protecting intellectual property often focus on cutting-edge technologies, corporate branding campaigns, and widely distributed artistic works like movies and music. But let’s mix things up a bit. Follow us through this four-part series as we answer a question that is sure to hit home for anyone with taste buds—can you protect a food recipe? In Part 1, here, we examined whether food recipes are eligible for copyright protection.
We concluded that, although a recipe itself is not eligible, you can claim copyrights in certain commentary, illustrations, or other expressive elements used to present the recipe. Here, in Part 2, we investigate whether patent protection offers a viable solution for chefs, bakers, restaurateurs, and others hoping to safeguard their culinary creations. Later, in Parts 3 and 4, we will break down whether recipes are eligible for trade secret protection (Part 3) or trademark/trade dress protection (Part 4).
PART 2: Can you Patent a Recipe?
To qualify for patent protection, an invention must be useful, new, and nonobvious. See 35 U.S.C. §§ 101-103. It must also fall into one of the Patent Act’s defined categories of “patent-eligible subject matter” (some things are outright barred from receiving patent protection, such as a mathematical algorithm). See 35 U.S.C. § 101. To warrant patent protection, a recipe must satisfy all four requirements.
On the “patent-eligible subject matter” front, a recipe would need to qualify as either a “process,” a “machine,” a “manufacture,” or a “composition of matter.” See 35 U.S.C. § 101. Of those categories, we can safely eliminate “machine” as a potential candidate and focus on the remaining possibilities.
A “process” is “a mode of treatment of certain materials to produce a given result. It is an act, or series of acts, performed upon the subject-matter to be transformed and reduced to a different state or thing.”Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 70 (1972). Most recipes are essentially a set of step-by-step instructions for combining specified ingredients to produce a dish or food product. Thus, as a “series of acts” that transforms ingredients into a different end product, a recipe could constitute a patent-eligible “process.”
A “manufacture,” more commonly called “an article of manufacture,” is “an article produced from raw or prepared materials by giving to these materials new forms, qualities, properties, or combinations, whether by handlabor or by machinery.” Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 308 (1980). A recipe itself does not qualify as an article of manufacture, but many consumer food products created according to a recipe likely qualify (think Hot Pockets® sandwiches, for example).
A “composition of matter” is “all compositions of two or more substances and all articles, whether they be the results of chemical union, or of mechanical mixture, or whether they be gases, fluids, powders or solids, for example.” Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. at 308. Most recipes—a basic cake batter recipe, for instance—call for the mechanical or chemical mixture of “fluids” and “powders or solids” (e.g., water and flour). Accordingly, although a recipe is not a “composition of matter,” the end product could be.
Thus, a recipe can be a patent-eligible process, while a resulting dish or food product can be a patent-eligible article of manufacture or composition of matter. But whether or not a recipe is patent-eligible subject matter is only one of four hurdles along the road to patent protection. The recipe must also be useful, new, and nonobvious. The bar for what counts as “useful” under the Patent Act is low and, as a result, virtually every recipe will satisfy the usefulness requirement.
When it comes to demonstrating that a recipe is “new” and “nonobvious,” however, the road gets much tougher. Every recipe seeking patent protection must distinguish itself from the millions of recipes that preceded it (eating is, after all, one of our most basic needs). Not only are multitudes of recipes already known, but in many cases the properties and effects of the underlying ingredients are also well-known. Adding a roux to a soup, for example, will predictably thicken the soup. Adding chocolate chips to a cake recipe will predictably increase the likelihood that the resulting cake will taste like, well, chocolate. When examining patent applications, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office often views the results obtained from combining well-understood ingredients as having been predictable or obvious to people of ordinary skill in the culinary arts.
But take heart, innovative foodies, because the Patent Office does occasionally grant patents for recipes, dishes, and food products. Many of them involve an unconventional step, ingredient, or end product. Check out, for instance, U.S. patent number 5,894,027 titled Milk and protein powder-coated cereal products; U.S. patent number 8,147,893 titled Refrigerator stable pressurized baking batter; U.S. patent number 5,510,137 titled Sweet ice stuffs and jellied foods; or U.S. patent number 8,236,366 titled Flavorful Waterless Coffee. As the Patent Office recently put it, “[i]f you look at most of these patents, you’ll find that the recipe was more likely to have been created in a laboratory than on a kitchen counter.” Larry Tarazano. Can Recipes Be Patented? United States Patent and Trademark Office. InventorsEye 4:3 (June 2013). With the popularity of modernist techniques like “molecular gastronomy” on the rise (molecular gastronomy focuses on transforming physical and chemical properties to produce new tastes and textures), we could see a slight uptick in recipe patents in the coming years.
In short, returning to our original question—can you patent a food recipe?—the answer is “yes, if you can overcome the difficult nonobviousness hurdle.” Stay tuned for the next part of our series as we investigate the benefits of safeguarding a recipe under the banner of trade secret protection.
©2015 All Rights Reserved. Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP
