How one well-known company is harvesting recipes and images from other websites to use on its own subscription-only app. It might be legal but is it right?
This is a good article. Made me think quite a bit.
I am not sure about anyone ‘owning’ recipes. IMHO cooks may develop recipes, but in truth the developer relies on the work of other cooks and other meals and flavours floating around in their heads.
Cooking is such a craft, it relies on the skill and knowledge of the cook more than any recipe. How is it possible to ‘own’ a particular gathering of ingredients and preparation of those same ingredients.
I have hundreds of cookbooks, save all kinds of recipes on the internet. If I see a recipe referenced on a blog, I go to the original blog for the recipe. I love reading the authors take on the recipe, the ingredients, the process… and then, even the first time I prepare it, I change it, make it my own.
How is it possible to feel aggrieved when someone sells a recipe put on line for free use?
Is it on behalf of the person who paid for something when they didn’t have to? Is it simply because someone made money and you didn’t? You could have, you chose to be generous.
The recipe harvesters (as I read) don’t do justice to the recipes, don’t get them right.., but they are providing a service to those too lazy or uninterested or uninformed. Someone is willing to pay for that service.
And perhaps over time, a non-cook will become a discerning cook and start looking at the recipes developed by cooks who actually cook… instead of aggregate.
I agree! But there’s still enormous value in the recipe. Many many people without the innate skill to cook rely on recipes for guidance, and to give them confidence.
I agree too, recipes are a great source of inspiration and guidance. But so often these days we seem to give recipes all the power, disregarding the cook.
Really interesting read and research, Sue. I used to work on design and visuals for a start-up developing a food app which aggregated recipe content from cookbooks. They assiduously approached publishers to license all of that content. It took so much time, but needed to be done well. The benefit of cookbook content is that the recipes have already been thoroughly edited and proofed and it was hoped that the permanent link to the book should ensure greater sales and exposure for that title. It was curated content. The problem with non-curated aggregation, quite apart from the ethical issues you flag here, is that no-one can rely on the quality of the information, hence your missing chunks of recipe etc. I have misgivings about a number of aspects of the Zoe app.
It absolutely undermines your confidence in the app doesn’t it? I’m told that Zoë’s position is that it’s not a breach of copyright if users have uploaded recipes themselves to the app. If that’s true, it’s laughable but frankly I don’t believe that all the recipes on the Zoë app are user uploaded.
Really interesting I’m a long term Zoe user and created an FB sharing recipes for free I’m scrupulous about not allowing uploaded images and photos of books and have seen some of my recipes appear on Zoe that other members have scanned and posted there’s no reference to me or my site at all. I don’t make any money from this but my hard work and costs of creating and testing should be acknowledged. I also have 100 testers and tasters who input to their development. I’m about to publish a book I wonder what will happen then. But like many others I’ve collected recipe books for last 50 years and read about cooking all the time for inspiration. I always credit if I’ve been inspired elsewhere. My understanding when I set up my fb page is ingredients are not subject to copyright but photos method and other text is.
Really fascinating and alarming reading. I hope Zoe sort this out to the satisfaction of all parties. Sounds like this could benefit recipe writers if credit and reward could be properly allocated, but what are the chances? In any case, it's this sort of article that makes Substack the essential place to head for great food writing.
Super interesting article, thanks Sue. I wouldn't say I think it's ok. However, as a Zoe user (and someone with a pretty restricted diet), what I do think is that I'm not looking to use the app as a source of recipes, I'm inputting a recipe in order to put it through the rating system to see whether I'd even consider using it. So as part of a longlisting process if you like. And IRL there's only one Zoe recipe I make regularly and it is one of their own that they have posted on Instagram.
So interesting. Thank you for investigating. I started wondering about this when I saw a recipe I'd developed for a brand and the image I shot up there the other week. I supposed that because it was freely available online it was far game, but when you put it as you have in this piece I begin to wonder....
Perhaps so. In their defence, it’s freely available online and they credit the brand/www it’s from. On the downside, it doesn’t sit well that they’re charging for content that isn’t theirs and is free elsewhere. Will be interested to see where this goes…
Mmmm. The point I was trying to make was just because it’s freely available on line doesn’t make it free for others to commercialise. Indefensible IMHO
No, not a sponsorship thing. They gifted me a subscription to try when they launched and I’ve shared my usage experiences as I’ve gone along. That’s as far as it goes.
This is terrible, and intellectual theft. Someone just randomly lifted Sanjana Modha's beautiful content, shared it without her permission and that too without attribution. Lots of us spotted it and protested
Another interesting and rather concerning fact - some of the nutritional analysis for these lifted recipes is incorrect. The Zoe app has made some rather basic errors when calculating the nutrition, for example on one recipe I’d worked on for the original developer - a 400g can of chickpeas was not correctly input as the 240g drained weight but 400g - this of course gives the recipe an incorrect Zoe score! These are details you’d expect the app to get right given how score driven the process is.
This is a good article. Made me think quite a bit.
I am not sure about anyone ‘owning’ recipes. IMHO cooks may develop recipes, but in truth the developer relies on the work of other cooks and other meals and flavours floating around in their heads.
Cooking is such a craft, it relies on the skill and knowledge of the cook more than any recipe. How is it possible to ‘own’ a particular gathering of ingredients and preparation of those same ingredients.
I have hundreds of cookbooks, save all kinds of recipes on the internet. If I see a recipe referenced on a blog, I go to the original blog for the recipe. I love reading the authors take on the recipe, the ingredients, the process… and then, even the first time I prepare it, I change it, make it my own.
How is it possible to feel aggrieved when someone sells a recipe put on line for free use?
Is it on behalf of the person who paid for something when they didn’t have to? Is it simply because someone made money and you didn’t? You could have, you chose to be generous.
The recipe harvesters (as I read) don’t do justice to the recipes, don’t get them right.., but they are providing a service to those too lazy or uninterested or uninformed. Someone is willing to pay for that service.
And perhaps over time, a non-cook will become a discerning cook and start looking at the recipes developed by cooks who actually cook… instead of aggregate.
This is such a good point you are making here: "Cooking is such a craft, it relies on the skill and knowledge of the cook more than any recipe."
I agree! But there’s still enormous value in the recipe. Many many people without the innate skill to cook rely on recipes for guidance, and to give them confidence.
I agree too, recipes are a great source of inspiration and guidance. But so often these days we seem to give recipes all the power, disregarding the cook.
Interesting point of view, thank you.
Wow, that's a lot to think about. Thanks for bringing this to the light.
Really interesting read and research, Sue. I used to work on design and visuals for a start-up developing a food app which aggregated recipe content from cookbooks. They assiduously approached publishers to license all of that content. It took so much time, but needed to be done well. The benefit of cookbook content is that the recipes have already been thoroughly edited and proofed and it was hoped that the permanent link to the book should ensure greater sales and exposure for that title. It was curated content. The problem with non-curated aggregation, quite apart from the ethical issues you flag here, is that no-one can rely on the quality of the information, hence your missing chunks of recipe etc. I have misgivings about a number of aspects of the Zoe app.
It absolutely undermines your confidence in the app doesn’t it? I’m told that Zoë’s position is that it’s not a breach of copyright if users have uploaded recipes themselves to the app. If that’s true, it’s laughable but frankly I don’t believe that all the recipes on the Zoë app are user uploaded.
Really interesting I’m a long term Zoe user and created an FB sharing recipes for free I’m scrupulous about not allowing uploaded images and photos of books and have seen some of my recipes appear on Zoe that other members have scanned and posted there’s no reference to me or my site at all. I don’t make any money from this but my hard work and costs of creating and testing should be acknowledged. I also have 100 testers and tasters who input to their development. I’m about to publish a book I wonder what will happen then. But like many others I’ve collected recipe books for last 50 years and read about cooking all the time for inspiration. I always credit if I’ve been inspired elsewhere. My understanding when I set up my fb page is ingredients are not subject to copyright but photos method and other text is.
That’s my understanding. The photo definitely isn’t.
Just another example of the disregard people have for our output.
Very interesting piece, Sue. Well done for investigating and flagging it up.
Really fascinating and alarming reading. I hope Zoe sort this out to the satisfaction of all parties. Sounds like this could benefit recipe writers if credit and reward could be properly allocated, but what are the chances? In any case, it's this sort of article that makes Substack the essential place to head for great food writing.
Thanks Andy. I think it’s so important too. Feel free to share it!
Done!
Super interesting article, thanks Sue. I wouldn't say I think it's ok. However, as a Zoe user (and someone with a pretty restricted diet), what I do think is that I'm not looking to use the app as a source of recipes, I'm inputting a recipe in order to put it through the rating system to see whether I'd even consider using it. So as part of a longlisting process if you like. And IRL there's only one Zoe recipe I make regularly and it is one of their own that they have posted on Instagram.
yes, I agree. I’ve rarely ever used the recipes. But the recipe collection is one of their selling points.
So pleased you've brought the issue to light.
Wow, somehow I feel other apps like these are probably doing the same thing.
I’m sure you’re right. I’ve been contacted by bloggers who say it happens all the time.
So interesting. Thank you for investigating. I started wondering about this when I saw a recipe I'd developed for a brand and the image I shot up there the other week. I supposed that because it was freely available online it was far game, but when you put it as you have in this piece I begin to wonder....
I really don't think it's fair game. It's your work. Maybe none of us value what we do highlight enough?
Perhaps so. In their defence, it’s freely available online and they credit the brand/www it’s from. On the downside, it doesn’t sit well that they’re charging for content that isn’t theirs and is free elsewhere. Will be interested to see where this goes…
Mmmm. The point I was trying to make was just because it’s freely available on line doesn’t make it free for others to commercialise. Indefensible IMHO
Well, quite - you’re spot on there!
Oops. I don’t realise you had a sponsorship thing with Zoe - is that right?
No, not a sponsorship thing. They gifted me a subscription to try when they launched and I’ve shared my usage experiences as I’ve gone along. That’s as far as it goes.
Interesting read. Thank you
Thanks. I can’t quite get my head around how some people think this isOK
What platform was that Malika?
That’s really interesting. There’s obviously something wrong with the way the app uploads recipes.
This is terrible, and intellectual theft. Someone just randomly lifted Sanjana Modha's beautiful content, shared it without her permission and that too without attribution. Lots of us spotted it and protested
Another interesting and rather concerning fact - some of the nutritional analysis for these lifted recipes is incorrect. The Zoe app has made some rather basic errors when calculating the nutrition, for example on one recipe I’d worked on for the original developer - a 400g can of chickpeas was not correctly input as the 240g drained weight but 400g - this of course gives the recipe an incorrect Zoe score! These are details you’d expect the app to get right given how score driven the process is.