Malaysia Seeking to Copyright Food? 330
Techdirt is reporting that Malaysia seems to be jumping on the copyright/trademark bandwagon and attempting to protect the "ownership" of certain ethnic foods. Of course, this may just be a massive PR push in an attempt to grab some eyeballs. "Last year, around this time, we noted that the country of Lebanon was trying to claim that it owns hummus and other middle eastern foods, such as falafel, tabouleh and baba gannouj, and that no other country could produce them. It seems that other parts of the world are seeing the same sort of thing, as Malaysia is trying to declare that it owns popular Malaysian dishes, like nasi lemak."
no worries (Score:4, Funny)
Worry not, there will be cheap knockoffs coming out of China soon enough.
Re:no worries (Score:5, Insightful)
In the same way that Bulgaria, Serbia, and Belgium produce 'cheap knockoffs' of Feta cheese, but have to call it something else, because Greece has been awarded the 'copyright' by the EU?
"Appellation d'origine contrôlée" has existed for centuries, and there are plenty of sensible arguments for and against it. I would not mind seeing where Slashdot stands on that issue, but presenting what Malaysia is doing as a brand new concept is ridiculous.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:no worries (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, this is different. In the EU and US, names of food is controlled as trademarks. You can still produce sparking wine in the Napa Valley, but you can't claim it came from the Champagne region.
Of course not, because that would be an outright lie. It was produced in Napa Valley, USA not the Champagne, France, so of course you can't claim it came from Champagne, France.
I think you meant that you can't call California sparkling wine "Champagne", which is true for the reason you outlined.
That said, things are getting pretty dodgy with Wine.
A current problem in BC for example is that less reputable companies are taking grapes grown in wineries in Croatia and elsewhere in Eastern Europe, and are shipping them to be bottled in British Columbia, Canada and are thus legally and accurately bearing labels claiming 'bottled in the Oakanagan, British Columbia'.
Of course, since the grapes aren't actually grown in the oakanagan, the whole thing is a complete farce. But these wines are ending up on "BC wine lists", and being sold out liquor stores as "BC Wines" I don't know offhand but I wouldn't be surprised if California's good name is being similarly tainted by this practice.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see that in TFA. It just says that they want some the dishes to be declared as "Malaysian".
Which is sort of stupid, since almost everyone in Malaysia with a famous recipe is a relatively recent immigrant - only the indigenous people have been around for any significant amount of time and the government treats them like shit.
But it's not particularly aggressive or co
Re:no worries (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem here is that what Malaysia is doing, as described by the article linked from the article linked from the posting (grrrr), isn't in fact a form of AOC. AOC has never been applied to recipes; it has only been applied to ingredients and processed agricultural products.
In the case of an AOC, the intent is clear: if the region of Sancerre makes a remarkable wine and people seek it out as being special, it would be good to prevent winemakers not from Sancerre from labeling ultra-cheap wines as "Sancerre" and selling it for inflated prices. In the case of Malaysian recipes, on the other hand, it's not at all clear what the intent is, since it just cannot be analogous. Recipes are things that people prepare when they want to eat them, not a finished foodstuff that they buy. The closest I can stretch this analogy would be some sort of ban on preventing non-Malaysian companies from labeling frozen or instant packaged meals with the names of the Malaysian dishes, but even that just degenerates into absurdity when you try to apply it to restaurants who cook their own nasi lemak on a per-order basis.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I make my own cheese, but I don't name it anything, I eat it.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Serbia is not part of the EU. So yeah, you can sell Serbian-made cheese in Serbia and call it "feta," but any cheese you export to the EU may not be labeled so. And if you joined the EU, unless you got a special concession about this, those cheeses you mention would have to change their labeling.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I'd guess Malaysia would produce their own cheap knockoffs.
Re: (Score:2)
Thats the case with hamburgers and hot dogs and other traditional american food too.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the added melamine is very filling
Depends on the country and/or food. (Score:4, Funny)
I don't think anyone is going to challenge Scotland's copyright of haggis.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Depends on the country and/or food. (Score:5, Informative)
Or, rather, the Champagne district's right to Champagne and the Cognac district's right to Cognac.
There's nothing unique in the attempt to protect the designation of origin [wikipedia.org].
Re:Depends on the country and/or food. (Score:5, Informative)
According to that article, the U.S. does not generally recognize protection of the designation of origin, unless it is for products made within the U.S. Apparently you can have American champagne, but vidalia onions can only come the Vidalia, Georgia region.
However, I'm pretty sure protection of designation of origin is not covered under copywrite laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck, I need more caffeine, "copyright". Wheres the damn edit button?
That's not quite accurate. (Score:4, Interesting)
You're not generally allowed to mislabel your products in the USA to make consumers believe that they come from some region that they do not, especially if you do so to mislead consumers into paying a higher price. There exist specific exceptions in regional wine names that are recognized as semi-generics [wikipedia.org] with special rules, and some regional product names that are seen as generics ("parmesan"). You can take your Wisconsin cheese and label it "Parmesan," and nobody will go after you in the United States; but if you label your $5/lb Wisconsin cheese as "Parmigiano Reggiano," that's not cool.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How is it stupid?
Many people want, for example, to know that their champagne comes from Champagne, and that their cornish pasty is from Cornwall. It's a simple consumer protection measure.
No one is stopping you from buying "meat and potato pasty" (made in Leeds) if you prefer, or the sparkling wine (made in Germany).
Re:Depends on the country and/or food. (Score:4, Interesting)
As an example, historically (and we're talking at least a thousand years, since it gets mentioned in the Domesday Book) Cheshire cheese was manufactured by the same process in no less than five counties; Cheshire itself, plus Denbighshire, Flintshire, Shropshire and Staffordshire. The first two of those are in Wales, while the latter two and Cheshire itself are in England. According to the EU rules, only Cheshire cheese which is manufactured in Cheshire itself is now entitled to the name, despite all of the historical precedent to the contrary.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
...which in itself no longer has any meaning given the amorphous nature of Cheshire's borders. The majority of Cheshire farms have been in Manchester or Merseyside at least once in the last 40 years (never mind the last 400.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Haggis: brought to Scotland (before it was Scotland) by either the Romans, Vikings, or another group, via most of Europe ....
Not a regional food at all ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Depends on the country and/or food. (Score:5, Funny)
Oh come on, give haggis a break already! It's really not that bad, and in fact has been described as having "an excellent nutty texture and delicious savoury flavour" (source of source [wikipedia.org])... 'course, as with all foods, it'll vary based on who made it.
I urge you, give haggis a chance! I actually rather like it! Black pudding, OTOH... *shudder*
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, that's how Austin Powers described Fat Bastard's feces. Doesn't make me want to try that, either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think anyone is going to challenge Scotland's copyright of haggis.
Attribution for haggis is controlled by slander laws, not copyright.
Re: (Score:2)
oops.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really have to ask?
Re: (Score:2)
Well the haggis animal very definitely lives on the Scottish mountains. That is just some cheap synthetic knock off.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The recipe for Stilton Cheese [stiltoncheese.com] is well known, but you can only call it Stilton if it has been made in the three Counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire. It cannot be made in the village of Stilton that gave it its name since, at the time the EU came up with the definition, it had been forgotten that it had
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"The recipe for Stilton Cheese [stiltoncheese.com] is well known, but you can only call it Stilton if it has been made in the three Counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire. It cannot be made in the village of Stilton that gave it its name since, at the time the EU came up with the definition, it had been forgotten that it had ever been produced there!"
But wait, there is more.
- it can only be produced in the three Counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire
- it must be made
Kind of amusing (Score:4, Informative)
I find it interesting that Malaysia would be claiming there should be copyright protection for foods, when there isn't any kind of copyright protection for anything else in that country/region -- not in any real sense.
This isn't a troll -- just try going to any market in Malaysia. You'll find whole tables of knockoff DVDs, knockoff Paul Frank T-shirts, knockoff shoes, knockoff handbags ... the average person sees nothing wrong with it.
I once went to a DVD store in a mall on the island of Penang, off the west coast of Malaysia, probably around 2002. I mean this was a real store with one of those roll-down metal cages that go in front of the plate glass windows when they close shop, inside a real mall with a food court and everything. This store had one small bookcase full of legitimate, imported American DVDs. The entire rest of the store was given over to knockoffs. You could get DVD-5 copies for about $5 and the DVD-9s were about $8. They were well aware what they were doing; they even had DVD players and TVs on hand so you could double-check the video quality of the copies you were buying. I picked up a set of the original Star Wars trilogy on DVD-9, plus a copy of Raiders of the Lost Ark. In passing, I told one of the kids working there (he was wearing a polo shirt with the store's logo on it) that you couldn't buy any of these movies in America (at that time, none of them was available on DVD). He looked at me like I'd just told him I'd never seen rice before.
Mind you, technically it was all illegal. Malaysia actually seemed to have a pretty strong force of "copyright cops" that would do sweeps for pirated DVDs. The problem was that copyright law was one of those laws that was so poorly respected by the average citizen -- basically, everybody living in Malaysia had broken it at least once, and probably did so routinely -- that there was absolutely no respect for enforcement, which in turn leads to corruption. Everybody involved in the knock-off trade seemed to have a contact who would tip them off when a sting was about to happen. I met some Australian tourists who were hoping to go to the DVD store I mentioned, but when they went (on a Wednesday afternoon) it was closed. Apparently they had been warned not to open that day. Similarly, even guys who were hawking their wares on blankets at the night markets would occasionally get calls on their cell phones, then immediately roll up their bundles and walk away while customers were still waving money.
Still, no doubt this effort by the Malaysian government does a couple things:
Personally, though, I doubt the average Malaysian cares much more about it than Americans care when we find out our home city is now "the sister city of Vladivostok." Sounds great, but what difference does it make to me?
Indonesia is very ticked off (Score:5, Interesting)
Because Malaysia has been claiming certain Indonesian dances are Malaysian.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/09/16/issue-%E2%80%98betawi-group-threatens-harass-malaysians%E2%80%99.html [thejakartapost.com]
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
RMS (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I think you just described all the flavors of Linux! They all follow the same general recipe, but they are all slightly different after baked/compiled. One company likes to add a splash of gnome, the other likes kde, etc. Naturally this plays hell at a banquet when the guests see the bowl labeled with the name of the dish but have no idea if their utensils will work quite right with that particular homemade dish. They prefer the storebought box of mac-n-cheese that tastes the same every single time and
(c) -- seriuosly (Score:2, Funny)
let's see how this goes over
Surprising (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Surprising (Score:5, Insightful)
It sounds a little silly, but how different is it from other copyrights?
Copyrights cover creative works; it's patents that cover useful arts. Food is rendered uncopyrightable due to utility. Methods of preparing food, i.e. recipes, are uncopyrightable as well. While inventive chefs could seek patents, and some do, it seems to be fairly uncommon, and the requirement of novelty would make it useless here anyway.
What this really sounds like to me is a designation of origin issue, which is somewhat like a trademark. Personally, I'm not a big fan of them. Champagne, to me at least, is a product which can be made in many different places around the world. I don't mind putting a national or regional appellation on it (French champagne, Australian champagne) if it is applied equally to everyone, but I don't like the idea that it can only be called champagne at all if it is from a specific part of France, regardless of how similar or even identical it might be with the same product made elsewhere. This, IMO, doesn't inform customers, but misleads them, and doesn't aid the market, but hinders it (by implicitly discouraging competition by outside manufacturers).
Re: (Score:2)
Why just musicians descendants? Let's extend it a little.
I am of predominantly English and Scottish extraction, and have traced my descent from several of the most prominent inventors of the 17th through 19th centuries. If we could only make this scheme universal, For just one, I am probably close enough to both Fulton and Babbage to be able to collect royalties on some of the biggest developments in both power generation and computation in human history. There are probably a thousand
Re: (Score:2)
I'm also distantly related to Wittgenstein - how do I make money off of that?
Lets find some quotes and apply them to daily life, or at least daily life for a slashdotter.
Any internet post of ".jpg or it didn't happen" owes you license fees (note I'm old enough to remember when it was "gif or it didn't happen")
A picture is a fact.
The mentally deranged architect whom designed the building I work in probably owes royalties to Wittgenstein
"A man will be imprisoned in a room with a door that's unlocked and opens inwards; as long as it does not occur to him to pull rather than push."
And I have worked for several bosses whom stole this management aphorism from Wittgenstein.
I don't know why we are here, but I'm pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Copying a piece of code or a program is trivially easy, and your ability to create code has nothing to do with your ability to use the copied item.
Following a recipe to make food depends entirely on your ability to cook.
With the code, you already have the finished product (or very close to it, might need compiling, etc), whereas with the recipe, you simply have a list of instructions on how to get to the finished product, which may or may not turn out depending on your culinary abilities and/or experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and the recipe copyrights as is evidenced by kernel sanders
Dude. You've been spending too much time hacking your Linux box. But then, who hasn't? Excuse me while I recompile my colonel.
Re:we already copywritten recipes (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To add to what others have said, The Kentucky Fried Chicken C&Ds were not about recipes. They were about the naming and look of the restaurants. KFC claimed that certain restaurants were trying to lure in customers by appearing to be a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant by using similar color schemes and names such ask Kennedy Fried Chicken and Kantacky Fried Chicken.
It was a trademark claim, not a copyright claim.
You don't seem to know the difference between trade secrets, trademarks, copyrights, and pr
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Diluted Meaning (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
then there'll be free software analogies (Score:4, Insightful)
When people have to campaign for their freedom to share and change recipes, they can simply reverse Stallman's recipe example [fsfe.org]:
But these freedoms should not be strange to you. At least, not if you cook, because people who cook enjoy the same four freedoms in using recipes.
The freedom to cook the recipe when you want. Thatâ(TM)s freedom zero. The freedom to study the ingredients and how itâ(TM)s done, and then change it. Thatâ(TM)s freedom one. Cooks frequently change recipes. And then the freedom to copy it and hand copies to your friends. Thatâ(TM)s freedom two. And then, freedom three is less frequently exercised because itâ(TM)s more work, but if you cook your version of the recipes for a dinner with your friends, and a friend says "that was great, can I have the recipe?" you can write down your version of the recipe and make a copy for your friend.
The story behind it (Score:2, Informative)
Indonesia and Malaysia is currently in a...uh.. copyright war. For a few months, there are some cultural stuff (like dance, show, food) that each claims to origin from themselves. I believe it was started by a Malaysia tourism advertisement that claims certain dance to origin from Malaysia.
Not a new phenominon (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know how you could blame them. In 1997 a US company called RiceTek patented a strain of Rice they called Basmati, a name the Indians have been using for centuries. All kinds of companies take out defensive patents, where they never intend to collect money from other people, but they don't want to pay for obvious ideas either. There's no reason the same thing wouldn't happen in the copyright arena. From here [american.edu]:
It doesn't seem odd the Malaysians would seek to prevent similar problems. The situation isn't exactly the same, since this is a copyright and RiceTek took out a patent, but I think the business objective is the same.
Public Domain (Score:3, Interesting)
Although forces of evil like Disney would like to have it otherwise, copyrights are still for a limited period of time. In the U.S. this is even spelled out in our Constitution, with the copyrighted material them passing into Public Domain. This article is talking about traditional foods, not some newfangled "Invention" (which might be covered by shorter lasting patents than longer lasting copyright). So even if the concept of copyright on food were valid (and I believe it is bogus), wouldn't these foods have passed into Public Domain long ago?
Alternately, can a claim of copyright be made by a country? Wouldn't a copyright claim have to be made by an author? Clearly the government of these countries are not the authors of these foods, so they have no copyright claim on them. It is more reasonable to assume that the real author wanted their intellectual property to pass into public domain than to fall into the hands of politicians.
Not copyright (Score:3)
Well, the French own wine, right? (Score:2)
n/t
Human Foot? (Score:2)
It's a defensive move (Score:2)
If matter can be represented as information... (Score:3, Interesting)
...then food could possibly one day be copyrighted on the genetic or even molecular level. I wrote a story [gutenberg.org] which hints at this a short while ago.
Re:Just like Europe (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. Those are designations of origins. Champagne and Parma are actual places. You can make parmesan or champagne, but you can't call it such (in Europe, anyway) because such a designation would denote that the foodstuff actually came from that region, and if it sucked, it would reflect poorly on the region. In the USA, a syrup producer in Kansas could not call their product 'Vermont maple syrup.' Calling a cheese 'Parmesan' or a sparkling wine 'Champagne' is like calling a syrup 'Vermont.'
AFAIK, Hummus, falafel, and so forth are generic names for foods traditional to dozens of countries. Nasi lemak means 'rice in cream' and is also not a designation of origin, therefore, attempting to copyright it is ridiculous and no other country is going to honor Malaysia's demands. Not that we in the US honor Europe's protected designations of origins anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
I can think of at least one example of a protected food name which has nothing to do with origin. Feta cheese:
http://findarticles.com/p/art [findarticles.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That decision, which only holds weight in the EU, comes from a case that is, in my mind, legitimate. Belgium was selling a cow's milk cheese as feta, which is totally wrong. I'm pretty sure 'feta' is semi-generic in the US. But it sure as heck better be a salty, white sheep's milk cheese and not some cow's milk knock off. Blech.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm all for reasonable PDO's where there's a meaningful common generic name for the product; it's basic truth-in-advertising.
Sparkling wine; grana cheese. (Score:2, Interesting)
There's a perfectly decent generic term for sparkling wine. Talking about grana cheese generically is considerably more difficult, though, at least if you want people to understand you.
Oh, damn, I take it back. (Score:2, Interesting)
Style (Score:3, Insightful)
What's wrong with "Parmesan-style", "Champagne-style", etc.
You could require that the "style" be in the same size and font as the other part of the name on the packaging. You could also require that the actual origin be near the name: Parmesan-style cheese from Champagne.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sparkling wine is correct - though you it's mostly the French-owned companies (like Chandon) that call it that, plenty of the CA wineries call their sparking wine "champagne" (no capital C at least...)
But "powdered cheese"?!? You my friend, have clearly never made it past basic Kraft cheese food products. Have you ever had good Parmesean reggiano? Or in your culinary world, does Velveeta == cheddar?
Re: (Score:2)
In the USA, a syrup producer in Kansas could not call their product 'Vermont maple syrup.' Calling a cheese 'Parmesan' or a sparkling wine 'Champagne' is like calling a syrup 'Vermont.'
No it's not. The difference is that Vermont maple syrup has never been sold as just "Vermont". It's sold as "Vermont maple syrup". For better or worse "Champagne" has become a genericized trademark [wikipedia.org]. Nobody (besides a few wine snobs and angry Frenchmen) is going to look at you funny if you request 'champagne' instead of 'sparkling wine'.
Your own link contradicts you. (Score:2, Interesting)
Your own link contradicts you [wikipedia.org]. Champagne has never been a trademark; it's a protected designation of origin.
Re: (Score:2)
And that changes my point how, exactly? Go to any restaurant or liquor store in the United States and ask for 'champagne'. Nine out of ten of them will bring a list of sparkling wines, the vast majority of which aren't even French (let alone from 'Champagne')
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'd take some Vermont on my pancakes any day
Would you like the sandy loam or the loose clay?
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. Those are designations of origins. Champagne and Parma are actual places. You can make parmesan or champagne, but you can't call it such (in Europe, anyway) because such a designation would denote that the foodstuff actually came from that region, and if it sucked, it would reflect poorly on the region.
I wonder if there's any laws in Mexico (or US) for the product known as Tequila. Contrast Tequila with mezcal, and only the latter ever contains a "worm", etc.
Re:Just like Europe (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, within Mexico, tequila can only be made in the state of Jalisco and a small portion of the state of Guanajuato. It's also only to be made of blue Weber agave, which is a type of maguey. Tequila is a subset of the mezcales, and there are other mezcales, like bacanora. Other mezcales can be made with other types of maguey.
Internationally, "tequila" was granted an OAC in 1977, but the USA doesn't recognize OAC as pointed out in so many other posts. Instead, the USA (and presumably other countries) depend on trade agreements to protect specific names, and that's the case with tequila in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, we sidestep silly restrictions such as your "Vermont syrup" example. Wisconsin cheese is constantly being trucked into California, taken out of the boxes, dropped into other boxes labeled "Packaged in California" with no hint of it's origins.
Customers are suckers, aren't they?
Re: (Score:2)
By definition, Champagne (the beverage) comes exclusively from the Champagne region of France. Everything else is "Sparkling white wine".
The United States have recognized the exclusive nature of this name, yet maintain a legal structure that allows longtime domestic producers of sparkling wine to continue to use the term "champagne" under specific circumstances. Some states have laws banning this usage.
If, for decades if not centuries, Maple syrup was only available from Vermont, from specific Maple trees w
Re:Just like Europe (Score:4, Funny)
Let me get you a "facial tissue" to help with that runny nose.
Oh wait, of course I meant "Kleenex".
Re:Just like Europe (Score:4, Funny)
Look, that's just putting a band-aid on the problem. You can't just xerox a product to make an identical copy.
This seems logical (Score:2)
This system seems to me to adequately protect consumers and producers, while acknowledging the fact that certain designations have become semi-generic. In America, people do not associate Champagne or Parmesan with a particular region, but with a particular taste or style. Champagne is synonymous with sparkling wine, labeling it 'California Champagne' removes any uncertainty as to origins while using a word that consumers are familiar with. While one could call Champagne 'sparkling wine,' what could one eve
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A Philly cheese-steak is a recipe not an ingredient. As I mentioned, you can't claim a syrup is from Vermont if it isn't. These food producing regions always have local quality control boards that ensure products from those regions meet certain standards. Someone from outside those regions could tarnish the name of the region by producing inferior products while piggy backing on the popularity of the quality controlled ingredients that actually come from the place and pass the local quality control standard
Re: (Score:2)
That's like saying an American company can't sell French Fries if they were made in Idaho. I can call the syrup I make in my backyard Vermont Syrup all I want.
Not without a law suit you can't. French Fries are a recipe, not an ingredient. Try selling Idaho russet potatoes that aren't from Idaho and see how long you last.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In England, we call them "chips". The things you call chips, we call "crisps".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You can't make "Delft" pottery except in Delft.
Delft pottery is a Dutch knockoff of Chinese pottery. Maybe the Chinese should sue?
Re: (Score:2)
You could make hummous. You just couldn't call it "hummous".
The concept is foreign to the US, but to much older areas, culturally, it's very important. You can't make "Delft" pottery except in Delft. You can't make "champaign" except in the Champaign region of France.
Please point me to the state, city or region in the middle east called "Hummous." I couldn't find it in Google Maps.
Then please point me to the city or region in Malaysia called "Nasi Lemak". I couldn't find that in Google Maps either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The US is the point here, as in:
Right now, US industries have pushed for some ultra restrictive laws such as the DMCA which cut our economic growth rate and give nations that ignore them a competitive advantage. Since the US won't recognise using a straight forward place name or item name that is in common use as a trademarkable, if Europe or South East Asia accept this, the US gets a more favorable balance of trade out of the situation. As a US citizen, I certainly appreciate the whole rest of the world sa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What you say is true, but the recent economic decline has meant that prime beef is showing up in unexpected places (like Costco) at cheap prices (like $9.99 per pound). See this article [wsj.com] in the Wall Street Journal. It is still unlikely to have prime beef sold at your local supermarket, but if you keep a good lookout you might find some surprises right now.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
But see, McDonald's is already 10 steps ahead of you there - when franchisees complained about the cost of a "double cheeseburger" ("universally" recognized as a sandwich with 2 hamburger patties and 2 slices of cheese) then on the Dollar Menu, they created a "new" sandwich with 2 patties, 1 slice of cheese and called it the "McDouble," moving the "double cheeseburger" up to something like $1.29 and putting the "McDouble" on the Dollar Menu.
And, speaking of Malaysia, they already go after anyone with "Mc" i
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And, speaking of Malaysia, they already go after anyone with "Mc" in the name - so no trademarking "McSandwich" or "McBreadWithMeat" or "McDoubleMcMeatProductWithMcCheeseProduct."
You missed the news [reuters.com].
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
1. Hamburg gets a PDO on Hamburger
2. Attempts to licence to McDonalds
3. McDonalds starts calling them Beefburgers
4. No profit
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What I found truly popular in the disparate countries I visited is fried chicken. Don't care how poor or rich the country, if they are a target market for KFC, you'd see groups of fat people gorging on buckets of them.
Fried Chicken©!!!
The devastating 1-2 combo with: Potato Chip©.
We are now THE global IP superpower. Take that all you fat foreign bastards, I mean, our valued customers!