OK, gang...here's the deal. Of course I agree with the "credit" comments. But did anyone go after Nagi for "stealing" a common recipe called Millionaire's Shortbread? That is what her Caramel Slice is, with a swap of some coconut for some flour. That recipe was first published in the 90s in an Australian magazine and the cookie has a deeper influence in Oz and the UK than the US. Google the recipe...it has hundreds of manifestations--Preppy Kitchen just did a video on it.
Nagi cannot win her case in the US. There have been precedents, and the plaintiff's wins were based on the verbatim use of the recipe text, not the formula of the ingredients list, which has been proven to be non-copyrightable. Richard Olney sued Richard Nelson and won (settled out of court) in the 70s. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=616c3194-d55b-4c53-a4ba-8ef64b57fe72
Another high-profile case was the late Chinese cooking expert, Barbara Tropp vs. Martha Stewart. Martha had published a sweet-sour eggplant dish called Strange-Flavor Eggplant, which was Barbara's. And there were two other recipes. Barbara was able to prove that the eggplant recipe's title does not exist in the Chinese lexicon, and was her invention all-around. And she won.
Nagi's baklava is pretty similar to any baklava ever made. And if proper listing of ingredients in the order they are supposed to be used is good practice, you are going to see similar recipe lists.
What bothers me is that Brooki doesn't seem to have any scruples about stealing or "sharing" recipes. My recipes, especially my Viennese ones, are all over the web. When I have the energy, I reach out to the blogger. Usually, they have stolen the recipe from a previous poster anyway! But what do I publish recipes for if not to impact the reader in some (hopefully good) way?
A lot of grief could have been avoided if basic standards of decency (like not stealing in general) would have been followed.
Agreed. In this case, it's pretty obvious Brooki was lazy and out to make a quick buck. No one is claiming either invented the recipe, but Brooki's copy/paste job is really what's being questioned. I would also say, if you are just "slightly adapting" or publishing a common recipe, the question should be: Does this recipe even need to be in my book? Does the world need another xyz recipe?
Part of being a great baker is learning to identify quality recipes. Some recipes, like pie crust, shortbread, and, like Rick says, Millionaire's Shortbread, have been around for so long that it's hard to be entirely original. I realized this in the writing of my book. I have so many great bakers to thank for inspiring my recipes, and in the headnotes of my cookbook, I do my best to credit those folks who taught me a technique, ratio, flavor combination, or other aspect of a recipe.
Even though I'm a newish recipe writer, I've already had a couple of well-known writers steal some of my recipes without credit. Alternatively, other writers asked permission to adopt parts of my recipes, with credit given (I always say yes). I think it depends on whether you're a writer who comes from a place of collaboration, abundance, and generosity or competition, gatekeeping, and scarcity.
Well first of all, Martin, you have good manners. That is apparent! I'm sure all the people whom you've mentioned will appreciate the effort you made.
I have taught many classes where a student has been bewildered by the idea that she (almost always a she) should not post other people's recipes verbatim. The argument I usually get is that it is giving those authors "free publicity."
How do you find out that someone has stolen your recipe? As in, how do you make the discovery? That must be so frustrating and disheartening, sorry to hear that. I agree - it’s about developing a knowledge of food and adapting flavours and ingredients once that knowledge is ingrained. I’m not really a baker, I’m a chef so I cook by tasting rather than following measurements but if I want to share a recipe I have to make it repeatedly and work out the quantities of ingredients so as to be reliable but I am constantly inspired and influenced by other chefs/restaurants/countries and love talking about those experiences that shape my cooking experience - it’s an evolvement isn’t it and I think people love to know they’ve inspired someone but to lift someone else’s hard work and pass it off as your own is reprehensible
In this case, a reader alerted her. A friend alerted me when he found two recipes that were very similar and he was confused. That was the impetus for the blog post from 2010 that I linked to in my newsletter.
Chefs are good at coming up with their own recipes. It's great that you test yours. For others who are less confident or haven't been to cooking school, they start with a recipe they like, which is the path to trouble if they don't substantially change it.
I was interviewed in Australia about recipe plagiarism, in response to this case. The piece was about how to give credit for recipe sources/inspirations which to me, is a no brainer. Citing sources or inspiration makes a recipe more interesting. It gives context and texture to the story of the recipe. https://amp.abc.net.au/article/105235536
I think both parties in this case exist in the world of mega blogging and creator culture, which demand a quick rotation of recipes and “content”. This leads to a lot of intentional/unintentional stealing of recipes.
My dumpling salad, a unique creation to reflect my experience as a Chinese person who is known as a salad maker, which I created for my book To Asia, With Love in 2019, and then followed up with a dumpling tomato salad on NYT COOKING, goes viral every summer, with almost zero credit to me. They all just call it viral with no citation of its origins. This type of thing is commonplace now in “creator culture”.
I’m surprised by the hoopla over caramel slice. Caramel slice is a recipe that almost every Australian family will have their version of and these versions are not that dissimilar to Nagi’s. The main difference she claims is the fact she uses “caramel” aka brown sugar, in place of golden syrup. However many friends have told me their families actually use brown sugar and not golden syrup in their caramel slices too.
Hey Hettie! Thanks for chiming in. This is a good point about need to have endless amounts of content that can be pushed out quickly. But of course, it does not excuse those who copy and paste.
It's unfortunate that your recipe goes viral with no credit to you. I guess it is just in people's consciousness now. At some level you can be proud, but it is definitely frustrating not to get the credit.
I guess it's one thing when everyday people use brown sugar and another when a famous food writer publishes a recipe without it or golden syrup and claims ownership.
It’s frustrating. I understand how someone feels having their original work ripped off. For example, I wrote the Cake Mix Doctor 25 years ago and created loads of those recipes or interviewed people and got their permission to print their recipes and stories. I once fought a fellow food writer for the rights to trademark the Dinner Doctor. It’s crazy when I think about what I have paid attorneys to defend what I created. What I considered original content. But now, I am out of that fast lane and life is simpler. I write about others, tell their stories, get permission, test recipes repeatedly, and then publish.
Oh, I agree. But I (mistakenly) assumed it would be understood that my comment was meant for instances where the author was clearly using a specific recipe already published with pretty much the same ingredients and/ or format, even if it's for something common or generic. It's pretty easy to state something like "The following is based on so-and-so's recipe...." and it just avoids any questions, criticism, or trouble down the line. With that said, I do understand it's very difficult to claim plagiarism when it comes to recipes in general. However, I tend to sympathize with Nagi who donates a huge amount of her blog's proceeds to a charitable cause. She's a very generous person who would have graciously given permission for a re-print or have been happy with a simple acknowledgement.
But thousands of recipes may have inspired you. A version your grandma made, a version you had at your favourite restaurant, and three recipes you saw on different cookbooks. It would be impossible and futile to credit all inspiration. It would be as if a literary author had to credit all works that inspire them. It makes no sense.
No recipe is born in a vaccum. No mind is a vaccum. All recipes are born as a result of other previous recipes and influences. Most of them cannot be untangled as individual sources in one's minds and memories.
I think one should credit when is basing their recipe another specific one, which serves as the base. Here I think credit is due.
This is the argument people make against crediting someone. But most of the time, that person has taken one recipe and maybe tried to change a few minor things. That's how they get into trouble.
Can we really assume that the person whose recipe we are using or basing our own on didn't take the recipe from somewhere else? I've seen recipes posted on websites of bloggers who spent lots of energy attacking folks for stealing their recipes that were copied from other websites. Weird, right? How many recipes are really original? I've seen this in my research reading literally centuries of cookbooks. Yes, if someone really personalizes a recipe - adds unusual or out of the common ingredients or methods. I reconstitute traditional recipes and usually study a dozen or more similar then try to combine them in some way or figure out what will work and what doesn't, but in the end, it's a traditional recipe. If it more closely resembles or was directly influenced by one or a few recipes, I say so. I do make a point of writing the recipe instructions in my own method and my own style.
It's funny....we have been discussing this topic since I started blogging a hundred years ago. And the answer is still kind fo fuzzy. Especially with recipes that are popular at any given time.
If you saw how she wrote the ingredients list and the method, it seems reasonable to assume they were copied. And yes, there are thousands of people who take other people's recipes, and it's hard to figure out who wrote the first one. People should personalize a recipe -- that's the whole point. Otherwise why should it exist, if it's just like every other one of its kind.
Yes we have been discussing this for a long time! It's endlessly fascinating to me.
I agree with you. Look at 15 different sources on line and in print for the same recipe and you'll find that either they are all pretty much the same or they are so wildly different from each other that it becomes impossible to imagine they all work.
That said, I research the history of French dishes - in French (meaning my sources are all French, not English). I do a first general google of the topic "histoire du XX" or "origines de XX" and get dozens of sources from pros (radio or news sites) or amateurs (bloggers) and every single one is the same. One person wrote the 5 line history of the dish and everyone else just copied and pasted it. Astounding.
Im 100% teamNagi/teamSally. I understand that ingredient lists can't be copyright protected, but in the case of Sally, the cake recipe in question lists 1 tablespoon vanilla (yes! One tablespoon) exactly how Sally's is written, right down to the parenthesis. And apparently one recipe Nagi is claiming was copied had an error - and Brooki's also contains the same error. That's pretty damning. Maybe not illegal, but in very poor taste, lazy, and puts both the publisher and author in such a bad light. I know copying is rampant in the food world, but how do they sleep at night?
Hmm, good catch about how the error was repeated in the cookbook! That does sound damning indeed. I'm not sure if a court would think it was criminal, however.
Publishers don't check recipes for originality most of the time, although they might be changing their approach due to AI. There is plaigerism software now, such as https://www.ithenticate.com. Thanks to David Lebovitz for pointing this software out to me!
I think that was the most surprising thing to me when I wrote my first cookbook. I have 3-ring binders full of recipes, each version with modifications and my notes on things I tested and changed, etc. I was ready to defend every single recipe as my original creation - other than like a Boston Cream pie that's such a classic, but I still included the 4 or 5 different recipes I tested, then merged into the one that made it into the book. HarperCollins never even asked where any of my recipes came from. Of course I would guess that every author book deal sheet squarely puts the onus on the author and would absolve the publisher of any wrongdoing if/when plagiarism is suspected or an accusation is made. I have heard there is plagiarism software out though. It would be a smart thing to do. I do think it's the mistakes and errors in recipes that most often trip up the copycats if they're not careful! Hard to claim you made the very same mistake in your recipes that someone else did!
Usually book contracts stipulate that the recipes are original, by the author, and those that aren't, are attributed. Most publishers (or rather, all...) don't have time or people to track down the source of recipes, so the onus is on the author. where it should be since we're creating the recipes.
Like you, I save all my recipe notes which show the progression of how I developed the recipe, including other resources I consulted. I think that's a good idea for cookbook authors to do.
Yes! I have heard there's software that recipes can be run through, but my book deals all are written so it seems that any potential claims would be made solely on me, not my publisher. Also, BIG fan David. I love your newsletter!
Some recipes are just classics that differ very little from writer to writer, the two in question, baklava and caramel slice being good examples, unless the writer has gone out of their way to imprint them with originality by adding an ingredient not normally associated with the base recipe.
You don’t make baklava by I don’t know, adding chocolate, let’s say or lemon curd. And you do make it in a specific order, so it’s a shame that the point had to be made about such generic recipes.
Probably, Brooke had read and tried many recipes over the years and possibly she had used Nagi’s as a template. It’s a bit lazy but hardly criminal.
I’d have had a problem with it if Nagi’s recipes had been particularly different or original but they are not.
I bet you could put a great many recipes for Baklava or caramel slice side by side and they would sound essentially the same.
These are good points. Baklava and caramel slice are pretty generic recipes. And you definitely could not add chocolate or lemon curd to baklava. I bet someone has tried, though. LOL.
Is the caramel slice a millionaire shortbread? That’s how I’m understanding it in which case there are so many established recipes for shortbread that I think if the ingredients and quantities were exactly the same you would surely HAVE to say “x’s version of shortbread base”? This is a fascinating minefield
A thought-provoking article, Dianne. (Exactly what I'm hear for!)
As a former news journalist it's simply anathema to me to even dance with the idea of plagiarism. I think I almost go overboard crediting people for recipes, even in the loosest of connections.
While it's true you can't trademark a Caesar salad, I think people fear that giving credit for recipes somehow diminishes their authority? That their readers will think, "uh-oh she was inspired by Ina Garten therefore she must not be worth her salt. I'll stop following." Whereas I think (and maybe this harkens back to my journo days), giving credit where credit's due adds validation.
I've always admired Nigella Lawson, as well all know, a major culinary superstar, who always champions and applauds other cooks in her "recipe of the day" shout outs. It's super cool, entirely magnanimous, and really, just makes her look more confident – not less.
LOL Erin. I hope nobody thinks that when they read a recipe. I am trained as a journalist also, and like you, I don't see how it would be harmful to give credit. Many people don't have any idea that they should credit someone.
I am credited by a chocolate historian as the original creator of oat milk white chocolate. The bars I made with it (and iterations I created such as strawberry oat milk, a toasted white caramel, etc) were widely known through the craft chocolate community. It took a few years, but oat milk white chocolate is now “everywhere,” including used by the big companies like Hershey’s. I am rarely credited, but seeking credit would itself be a full-time job. I have a book on bean to bar in the works; wondering if it gets published how or if this would change.
Congrats! At lest someone is giving you credit. Publishing more books on the subject would only enhance your expertise. But would you get more credit for creating oat milk white chocolate? Maybe, if it is a big part of your bio.
This is a topic I care a lot about. I write recipes and I also "adapt" recipes for my special diet - Specific Carbohydrate Diet - which is grain-free, gluten-free, sugar-free, and a bunch of other stuff-free. But, what I do is try to take common food dishes and special-dietize them to fit. I typically look at a ton of different recipes on how to make said thing and then create my own based on my own cooking knowledge and ingredient needs. I like to base on my childhood favorites, dishes my grandma used to make and stuff like that. My research is usually to find out how something is done or proper ingredient ratios - and yes The Flavor Bible has been a great resource for learning as well as The Food Lab. But, there are some things that just don't have a huge amount of variation when it comes to ingredients - like my basic Vanilla Almond Flour Cake. I based that recipe on what I learned adapting regular ingredients to my special diet ingredients, but is my cake really that different than someone else in my realm doing the same thing? I don't know.
I don't know if I should open this can of worms, but someone recently posted a recipe they got from asking ChatGPT to create it and it was very similar to not only one of my recipes, but my writing style for instructions. Since I'm so specialized, are my recipes a source for ChatGPT? Hopefully no one is putting that into a cookbook, but I found it disheartening.
This sounds like a great way to come up with new recipes, Sherry.
Re your Vanilla Almond Flour Cake, it's easy to see if others are writing similar recipes by just searching for it by that title. I just did it and saw lots of recipes. So the question I would ask is: W hat's different about yours? And if the answer is nothing, then I would wonder if there's anything you can do to it to make it different. Otherwise, why does anyone need yet another recipe for this cake? You have to answer that question.
AI is creating a whole new set of problems to solve. If you had written a cookbook prior to 2022, it's pretty likely that AI has already used it for machine learning.
What might trip the unwary is that amounts and ratios for something as simple as for instance a basic sponge are generally the same.
Obviously there are variations in these basics but mainly these things work because they are correct. Adding another 150g of flour or two more eggs will make something useless.
Then take sourdough for instance, how would you differentiate between something that generally uses three ingredients? As a base line I use around 200g starter to 400g flour and around 320g water. This works for me but I’m sure it works for others. Whose recipe is it when it comes to publishing?
My work is all my own but over decades I’ve been influenced by many cooks I’ve worked with but who’s to say where the original inspiration came from. Listing other people’s recipes is obviously wrong but going back to a sponge cake, you can’t use ten eggs and 100g flour as it just won’t work, so a standardised approach must be followed.
If I showed someone to make a Bearnaise, then my technique is probably the same as hundreds of chefs but who owns that recipe?
This is a good argument for not publishing a recipe for a sponge, sourdough or a Bearnaise, if there is nothing new to say -- no new technique, no good story in the headnotes, or the writing in the method is straightforward.
The best recipe writers add something new, even if it's just a strong voice, which cannot be underestimated.
Which is why I tell stories rather than just list ingredients. It’s far more personal. My work translates to the skill set much better in that format as it’s more flexible.
Thank you, Dianne, for putting this conversation on the table with such clarity. As David Lebovitz explains, recipes themselves may not be protected—but the way they’re expressed visually and narratively often is. And in today’s food culture, expression is everything. We don’t just cook—we style, photograph, record, and narrate. That’s where authorship lives now.
Which is why vague attribution like “inspired by” can fall short. In a community that values visual and aural creativity, imitation isn’t flattery unless it’s transparent, transformative, and honest. Otherwise, it’s just appropriation without acknowledgment.
The real issue here isn’t just ownership—it’s trust. Trust that our work, when it resonates, won’t be repackaged without credit. Trust that creative ecosystems can thrive when generosity is matched by integrity.
As someone who’s worked both in law and in the kitchen, I believe clarity, credit, and care are the ingredients that hold our creative communities together. And it takes mentors—like you, the author of Will Write for Food, who has dedicated her career to guiding the uninitiated—to help us find the ethical path forward.
For me, the offence is direct copying of sections of a recipe, so that the author of the book (in this case Brooki) does not maintain a cohesive voice throughout their work. Lazy copy-paste work is *not* writing. And in such case, the publishing/print credits should express the recipes as compiled or edited by, not authored by.
She did rewrite the method, and I assume she wrote her own headnotes. The ingredients lists are the issue.
I guess that's possible, but usually in publishing, a compilation refers to pre-published recipes by the author (such as America's Test Kitchen, which could have published the recipes before in a magazine or online).
OK, gang...here's the deal. Of course I agree with the "credit" comments. But did anyone go after Nagi for "stealing" a common recipe called Millionaire's Shortbread? That is what her Caramel Slice is, with a swap of some coconut for some flour. That recipe was first published in the 90s in an Australian magazine and the cookie has a deeper influence in Oz and the UK than the US. Google the recipe...it has hundreds of manifestations--Preppy Kitchen just did a video on it.
Nagi cannot win her case in the US. There have been precedents, and the plaintiff's wins were based on the verbatim use of the recipe text, not the formula of the ingredients list, which has been proven to be non-copyrightable. Richard Olney sued Richard Nelson and won (settled out of court) in the 70s. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=616c3194-d55b-4c53-a4ba-8ef64b57fe72
Another high-profile case was the late Chinese cooking expert, Barbara Tropp vs. Martha Stewart. Martha had published a sweet-sour eggplant dish called Strange-Flavor Eggplant, which was Barbara's. And there were two other recipes. Barbara was able to prove that the eggplant recipe's title does not exist in the Chinese lexicon, and was her invention all-around. And she won.
Nagi's baklava is pretty similar to any baklava ever made. And if proper listing of ingredients in the order they are supposed to be used is good practice, you are going to see similar recipe lists.
What bothers me is that Brooki doesn't seem to have any scruples about stealing or "sharing" recipes. My recipes, especially my Viennese ones, are all over the web. When I have the energy, I reach out to the blogger. Usually, they have stolen the recipe from a previous poster anyway! But what do I publish recipes for if not to impact the reader in some (hopefully good) way?
A lot of grief could have been avoided if basic standards of decency (like not stealing in general) would have been followed.
P.S. Rick -- thank you for that terrific link about Olney vs. Nelson. I hadn't read that before!
Thank you for giving us this context, Rick. I think the Washington Post also argued that if she was to sue, Maehashi would probably lose.
"Not stealing in general" seems to be a losing game. It's so easy!
And the name of that eggplant dish -- so wrong! I'm glad we have come a long way in that department.
Agreed. In this case, it's pretty obvious Brooki was lazy and out to make a quick buck. No one is claiming either invented the recipe, but Brooki's copy/paste job is really what's being questioned. I would also say, if you are just "slightly adapting" or publishing a common recipe, the question should be: Does this recipe even need to be in my book? Does the world need another xyz recipe?
I'm not sure about the word "lazy." The woman runs a bakery, is an influencer, and also has to be out promoting her cookbook.
But those are definitely good questions to be asking about any recipe, Lisa.
Sure, good points but a bit lazy when it came to actually collecting/creating/developing recipes etc. Copy/paste is the lazy way out.
Yes I agree! I’ve millionaires shortbread in my book because we made it at my bakery, but does it need to be in there? Maybe not!
Maybe Bellamy thought no one would notice 🤷🏼♀️
The side by side recipes do make it very questionable.
Brooke is not known for selling baklava in her shop, and rarely, if ever, does so why was it in her book? Have I missed something there?
Interesting! I guess she decided that she could branch out from what she sells at the shop.
Is the point to sue or to point out Bellamy’s misrepresentation of the recipes as her own?
At this point I think she is just pointing it out, but she is doing so with an attorney.
Part of being a great baker is learning to identify quality recipes. Some recipes, like pie crust, shortbread, and, like Rick says, Millionaire's Shortbread, have been around for so long that it's hard to be entirely original. I realized this in the writing of my book. I have so many great bakers to thank for inspiring my recipes, and in the headnotes of my cookbook, I do my best to credit those folks who taught me a technique, ratio, flavor combination, or other aspect of a recipe.
Even though I'm a newish recipe writer, I've already had a couple of well-known writers steal some of my recipes without credit. Alternatively, other writers asked permission to adopt parts of my recipes, with credit given (I always say yes). I think it depends on whether you're a writer who comes from a place of collaboration, abundance, and generosity or competition, gatekeeping, and scarcity.
Well first of all, Martin, you have good manners. That is apparent! I'm sure all the people whom you've mentioned will appreciate the effort you made.
I have taught many classes where a student has been bewildered by the idea that she (almost always a she) should not post other people's recipes verbatim. The argument I usually get is that it is giving those authors "free publicity."
How do you find out that someone has stolen your recipe? As in, how do you make the discovery? That must be so frustrating and disheartening, sorry to hear that. I agree - it’s about developing a knowledge of food and adapting flavours and ingredients once that knowledge is ingrained. I’m not really a baker, I’m a chef so I cook by tasting rather than following measurements but if I want to share a recipe I have to make it repeatedly and work out the quantities of ingredients so as to be reliable but I am constantly inspired and influenced by other chefs/restaurants/countries and love talking about those experiences that shape my cooking experience - it’s an evolvement isn’t it and I think people love to know they’ve inspired someone but to lift someone else’s hard work and pass it off as your own is reprehensible
In this case, a reader alerted her. A friend alerted me when he found two recipes that were very similar and he was confused. That was the impetus for the blog post from 2010 that I linked to in my newsletter.
Chefs are good at coming up with their own recipes. It's great that you test yours. For others who are less confident or haven't been to cooking school, they start with a recipe they like, which is the path to trouble if they don't substantially change it.
I was interviewed in Australia about recipe plagiarism, in response to this case. The piece was about how to give credit for recipe sources/inspirations which to me, is a no brainer. Citing sources or inspiration makes a recipe more interesting. It gives context and texture to the story of the recipe. https://amp.abc.net.au/article/105235536
I think both parties in this case exist in the world of mega blogging and creator culture, which demand a quick rotation of recipes and “content”. This leads to a lot of intentional/unintentional stealing of recipes.
My dumpling salad, a unique creation to reflect my experience as a Chinese person who is known as a salad maker, which I created for my book To Asia, With Love in 2019, and then followed up with a dumpling tomato salad on NYT COOKING, goes viral every summer, with almost zero credit to me. They all just call it viral with no citation of its origins. This type of thing is commonplace now in “creator culture”.
I’m surprised by the hoopla over caramel slice. Caramel slice is a recipe that almost every Australian family will have their version of and these versions are not that dissimilar to Nagi’s. The main difference she claims is the fact she uses “caramel” aka brown sugar, in place of golden syrup. However many friends have told me their families actually use brown sugar and not golden syrup in their caramel slices too.
Hey Hettie! Thanks for chiming in. This is a good point about need to have endless amounts of content that can be pushed out quickly. But of course, it does not excuse those who copy and paste.
It's unfortunate that your recipe goes viral with no credit to you. I guess it is just in people's consciousness now. At some level you can be proud, but it is definitely frustrating not to get the credit.
I guess it's one thing when everyday people use brown sugar and another when a famous food writer publishes a recipe without it or golden syrup and claims ownership.
It’s frustrating. I understand how someone feels having their original work ripped off. For example, I wrote the Cake Mix Doctor 25 years ago and created loads of those recipes or interviewed people and got their permission to print their recipes and stories. I once fought a fellow food writer for the rights to trademark the Dinner Doctor. It’s crazy when I think about what I have paid attorneys to defend what I created. What I considered original content. But now, I am out of that fast lane and life is simpler. I write about others, tell their stories, get permission, test recipes repeatedly, and then publish.
Trademarking is a whole other subject I didn't get into! But it must have been worth it for you to protect your work.
You are still writing recipes, though, and still crediting others when they inspire you. All good!
ALWAYS credit, even if the original recipe just "inspired" you!
Can't go wrong with that approach, Becky!
Oh, I agree. But I (mistakenly) assumed it would be understood that my comment was meant for instances where the author was clearly using a specific recipe already published with pretty much the same ingredients and/ or format, even if it's for something common or generic. It's pretty easy to state something like "The following is based on so-and-so's recipe...." and it just avoids any questions, criticism, or trouble down the line. With that said, I do understand it's very difficult to claim plagiarism when it comes to recipes in general. However, I tend to sympathize with Nagi who donates a huge amount of her blog's proceeds to a charitable cause. She's a very generous person who would have graciously given permission for a re-print or have been happy with a simple acknowledgement.
But thousands of recipes may have inspired you. A version your grandma made, a version you had at your favourite restaurant, and three recipes you saw on different cookbooks. It would be impossible and futile to credit all inspiration. It would be as if a literary author had to credit all works that inspire them. It makes no sense.
No recipe is born in a vaccum. No mind is a vaccum. All recipes are born as a result of other previous recipes and influences. Most of them cannot be untangled as individual sources in one's minds and memories.
I think one should credit when is basing their recipe another specific one, which serves as the base. Here I think credit is due.
This is the argument people make against crediting someone. But most of the time, that person has taken one recipe and maybe tried to change a few minor things. That's how they get into trouble.
Can we really assume that the person whose recipe we are using or basing our own on didn't take the recipe from somewhere else? I've seen recipes posted on websites of bloggers who spent lots of energy attacking folks for stealing their recipes that were copied from other websites. Weird, right? How many recipes are really original? I've seen this in my research reading literally centuries of cookbooks. Yes, if someone really personalizes a recipe - adds unusual or out of the common ingredients or methods. I reconstitute traditional recipes and usually study a dozen or more similar then try to combine them in some way or figure out what will work and what doesn't, but in the end, it's a traditional recipe. If it more closely resembles or was directly influenced by one or a few recipes, I say so. I do make a point of writing the recipe instructions in my own method and my own style.
It's funny....we have been discussing this topic since I started blogging a hundred years ago. And the answer is still kind fo fuzzy. Especially with recipes that are popular at any given time.
If you saw how she wrote the ingredients list and the method, it seems reasonable to assume they were copied. And yes, there are thousands of people who take other people's recipes, and it's hard to figure out who wrote the first one. People should personalize a recipe -- that's the whole point. Otherwise why should it exist, if it's just like every other one of its kind.
Yes we have been discussing this for a long time! It's endlessly fascinating to me.
I agree with you. Look at 15 different sources on line and in print for the same recipe and you'll find that either they are all pretty much the same or they are so wildly different from each other that it becomes impossible to imagine they all work.
That said, I research the history of French dishes - in French (meaning my sources are all French, not English). I do a first general google of the topic "histoire du XX" or "origines de XX" and get dozens of sources from pros (radio or news sites) or amateurs (bloggers) and every single one is the same. One person wrote the 5 line history of the dish and everyone else just copied and pasted it. Astounding.
It really is astonishing, I agree. It's terrible that people think they can just cut and paste whatever they find.
Impressive that you research in French, Jaimie!
I’m so glad you wrote about this!
Will write for food is one of the first books I read when starting my blog in 2010. It’s dogeared and well loved.
How nice of you to say so! Thank you Sheila.
Im 100% teamNagi/teamSally. I understand that ingredient lists can't be copyright protected, but in the case of Sally, the cake recipe in question lists 1 tablespoon vanilla (yes! One tablespoon) exactly how Sally's is written, right down to the parenthesis. And apparently one recipe Nagi is claiming was copied had an error - and Brooki's also contains the same error. That's pretty damning. Maybe not illegal, but in very poor taste, lazy, and puts both the publisher and author in such a bad light. I know copying is rampant in the food world, but how do they sleep at night?
Hmm, good catch about how the error was repeated in the cookbook! That does sound damning indeed. I'm not sure if a court would think it was criminal, however.
Publishers don't check recipes for originality most of the time, although they might be changing their approach due to AI. There is plaigerism software now, such as https://www.ithenticate.com. Thanks to David Lebovitz for pointing this software out to me!
I think that was the most surprising thing to me when I wrote my first cookbook. I have 3-ring binders full of recipes, each version with modifications and my notes on things I tested and changed, etc. I was ready to defend every single recipe as my original creation - other than like a Boston Cream pie that's such a classic, but I still included the 4 or 5 different recipes I tested, then merged into the one that made it into the book. HarperCollins never even asked where any of my recipes came from. Of course I would guess that every author book deal sheet squarely puts the onus on the author and would absolve the publisher of any wrongdoing if/when plagiarism is suspected or an accusation is made. I have heard there is plagiarism software out though. It would be a smart thing to do. I do think it's the mistakes and errors in recipes that most often trip up the copycats if they're not careful! Hard to claim you made the very same mistake in your recipes that someone else did!
Usually book contracts stipulate that the recipes are original, by the author, and those that aren't, are attributed. Most publishers (or rather, all...) don't have time or people to track down the source of recipes, so the onus is on the author. where it should be since we're creating the recipes.
Like you, I save all my recipe notes which show the progression of how I developed the recipe, including other resources I consulted. I think that's a good idea for cookbook authors to do.
Yes! I have heard there's software that recipes can be run through, but my book deals all are written so it seems that any potential claims would be made solely on me, not my publisher. Also, BIG fan David. I love your newsletter!
Some recipes are just classics that differ very little from writer to writer, the two in question, baklava and caramel slice being good examples, unless the writer has gone out of their way to imprint them with originality by adding an ingredient not normally associated with the base recipe.
You don’t make baklava by I don’t know, adding chocolate, let’s say or lemon curd. And you do make it in a specific order, so it’s a shame that the point had to be made about such generic recipes.
Probably, Brooke had read and tried many recipes over the years and possibly she had used Nagi’s as a template. It’s a bit lazy but hardly criminal.
I’d have had a problem with it if Nagi’s recipes had been particularly different or original but they are not.
I bet you could put a great many recipes for Baklava or caramel slice side by side and they would sound essentially the same.
These are good points. Baklava and caramel slice are pretty generic recipes. And you definitely could not add chocolate or lemon curd to baklava. I bet someone has tried, though. LOL.
Is the caramel slice a millionaire shortbread? That’s how I’m understanding it in which case there are so many established recipes for shortbread that I think if the ingredients and quantities were exactly the same you would surely HAVE to say “x’s version of shortbread base”? This is a fascinating minefield
just purchased your book and can’t wait! ☺️
A thought-provoking article, Dianne. (Exactly what I'm hear for!)
As a former news journalist it's simply anathema to me to even dance with the idea of plagiarism. I think I almost go overboard crediting people for recipes, even in the loosest of connections.
While it's true you can't trademark a Caesar salad, I think people fear that giving credit for recipes somehow diminishes their authority? That their readers will think, "uh-oh she was inspired by Ina Garten therefore she must not be worth her salt. I'll stop following." Whereas I think (and maybe this harkens back to my journo days), giving credit where credit's due adds validation.
I've always admired Nigella Lawson, as well all know, a major culinary superstar, who always champions and applauds other cooks in her "recipe of the day" shout outs. It's super cool, entirely magnanimous, and really, just makes her look more confident – not less.
LOL Erin. I hope nobody thinks that when they read a recipe. I am trained as a journalist also, and like you, I don't see how it would be harmful to give credit. Many people don't have any idea that they should credit someone.
I am credited by a chocolate historian as the original creator of oat milk white chocolate. The bars I made with it (and iterations I created such as strawberry oat milk, a toasted white caramel, etc) were widely known through the craft chocolate community. It took a few years, but oat milk white chocolate is now “everywhere,” including used by the big companies like Hershey’s. I am rarely credited, but seeking credit would itself be a full-time job. I have a book on bean to bar in the works; wondering if it gets published how or if this would change.
Congrats! At lest someone is giving you credit. Publishing more books on the subject would only enhance your expertise. But would you get more credit for creating oat milk white chocolate? Maybe, if it is a big part of your bio.
thank you, Dianne!
This is a topic I care a lot about. I write recipes and I also "adapt" recipes for my special diet - Specific Carbohydrate Diet - which is grain-free, gluten-free, sugar-free, and a bunch of other stuff-free. But, what I do is try to take common food dishes and special-dietize them to fit. I typically look at a ton of different recipes on how to make said thing and then create my own based on my own cooking knowledge and ingredient needs. I like to base on my childhood favorites, dishes my grandma used to make and stuff like that. My research is usually to find out how something is done or proper ingredient ratios - and yes The Flavor Bible has been a great resource for learning as well as The Food Lab. But, there are some things that just don't have a huge amount of variation when it comes to ingredients - like my basic Vanilla Almond Flour Cake. I based that recipe on what I learned adapting regular ingredients to my special diet ingredients, but is my cake really that different than someone else in my realm doing the same thing? I don't know.
I don't know if I should open this can of worms, but someone recently posted a recipe they got from asking ChatGPT to create it and it was very similar to not only one of my recipes, but my writing style for instructions. Since I'm so specialized, are my recipes a source for ChatGPT? Hopefully no one is putting that into a cookbook, but I found it disheartening.
This sounds like a great way to come up with new recipes, Sherry.
Re your Vanilla Almond Flour Cake, it's easy to see if others are writing similar recipes by just searching for it by that title. I just did it and saw lots of recipes. So the question I would ask is: W hat's different about yours? And if the answer is nothing, then I would wonder if there's anything you can do to it to make it different. Otherwise, why does anyone need yet another recipe for this cake? You have to answer that question.
AI is creating a whole new set of problems to solve. If you had written a cookbook prior to 2022, it's pretty likely that AI has already used it for machine learning.
What might trip the unwary is that amounts and ratios for something as simple as for instance a basic sponge are generally the same.
Obviously there are variations in these basics but mainly these things work because they are correct. Adding another 150g of flour or two more eggs will make something useless.
Then take sourdough for instance, how would you differentiate between something that generally uses three ingredients? As a base line I use around 200g starter to 400g flour and around 320g water. This works for me but I’m sure it works for others. Whose recipe is it when it comes to publishing?
My work is all my own but over decades I’ve been influenced by many cooks I’ve worked with but who’s to say where the original inspiration came from. Listing other people’s recipes is obviously wrong but going back to a sponge cake, you can’t use ten eggs and 100g flour as it just won’t work, so a standardised approach must be followed.
If I showed someone to make a Bearnaise, then my technique is probably the same as hundreds of chefs but who owns that recipe?
Minefield.
This is a good argument for not publishing a recipe for a sponge, sourdough or a Bearnaise, if there is nothing new to say -- no new technique, no good story in the headnotes, or the writing in the method is straightforward.
The best recipe writers add something new, even if it's just a strong voice, which cannot be underestimated.
Which is why I tell stories rather than just list ingredients. It’s far more personal. My work translates to the skill set much better in that format as it’s more flexible.
Thank you, Dianne, for putting this conversation on the table with such clarity. As David Lebovitz explains, recipes themselves may not be protected—but the way they’re expressed visually and narratively often is. And in today’s food culture, expression is everything. We don’t just cook—we style, photograph, record, and narrate. That’s where authorship lives now.
Which is why vague attribution like “inspired by” can fall short. In a community that values visual and aural creativity, imitation isn’t flattery unless it’s transparent, transformative, and honest. Otherwise, it’s just appropriation without acknowledgment.
The real issue here isn’t just ownership—it’s trust. Trust that our work, when it resonates, won’t be repackaged without credit. Trust that creative ecosystems can thrive when generosity is matched by integrity.
As someone who’s worked both in law and in the kitchen, I believe clarity, credit, and care are the ingredients that hold our creative communities together. And it takes mentors—like you, the author of Will Write for Food, who has dedicated her career to guiding the uninitiated—to help us find the ethical path forward.
I like how you think, Elli. It is an advantage to have worked in law! And thank you.
You have lots of energy and enthusiasm for your newsletter and the capacity to learn new things.
For me, the offence is direct copying of sections of a recipe, so that the author of the book (in this case Brooki) does not maintain a cohesive voice throughout their work. Lazy copy-paste work is *not* writing. And in such case, the publishing/print credits should express the recipes as compiled or edited by, not authored by.
She did rewrite the method, and I assume she wrote her own headnotes. The ingredients lists are the issue.
I guess that's possible, but usually in publishing, a compilation refers to pre-published recipes by the author (such as America's Test Kitchen, which could have published the recipes before in a magazine or online).