RSS
This Guy Holds Patents On Popcorn Chicken, Steak-Umms And Dozens Of Other Cuts Of Meat
from the meet-the-guy-who-patents-meat dept
Back in May, we were one of the first to write about some people claiming to have figured out a new cut of steak, and trying to patent that cut. The story got a lot of attention in a lot of places, as many people (reasonably) think that patenting a cut of meat seems particularly crazy. The good folks over at Planet Money just recently decided to explore the question of meat cut patents. They talk to Tony Mata, the "inventor" of that new meat cut, dubbed the Las Vegas steak, but the... er... "meat" of the conversation actually involves talking to his mentor, Gene Gagliardi, the "inventor" of the Steak-Umm, KFC's popcorn chicken and, according to this video, Popeyes' "Rip'n Chick'n", which Gagliardi calls "Fing'r Pick'n Chick'n" and for which he holds US Patent 5,346,711 on a "Method of making an animal muscle strip product."
In the Planet Money podcast, he also demonstrates some other cuts, which he won't let them videotape. I'm guessing he's okay with showing off the method in the '711 patent because, if I read it right, that patent expires in a month. In the video, he actually appears to admit that the "invention" itself wasn't original. He was "inspired" by the famed "Bloomin' Onion" at Outback Steakhouse, and a challenge from his wife to make a chicken version of the Bloomin' Onion.
Gagliardi appears to hold somewhere around 40 patents on various cuts of meat, all starting from back in the day when he tried to make the meat in Philly Cheesesteaks easier to chew, and supposedly came up with the product that eventually went on to be marketed as "Steak-umms," which were popular when I was a kid. As for "popcorn chicken," well that's US Patent 5,266,064, for a "Method of making a food product from the thigh of a bird and food product made in accordance with the method." And, if I'm reading it correctly, that patent should have expired earlier this year. Assuming that's the case, you may now be able to make your own popcorn chicken without infringing. How exciting.
Of course, for some of us, this still seems ridiculous. Is the progress of the "useful arts" really being promoted by giving a monopoly to someone figuring out new and different ways for fast food joints to chop up their chickens?
Gagliardi appears to hold somewhere around 40 patents on various cuts of meat, all starting from back in the day when he tried to make the meat in Philly Cheesesteaks easier to chew, and supposedly came up with the product that eventually went on to be marketed as "Steak-umms," which were popular when I was a kid. As for "popcorn chicken," well that's US Patent 5,266,064, for a "Method of making a food product from the thigh of a bird and food product made in accordance with the method." And, if I'm reading it correctly, that patent should have expired earlier this year. Assuming that's the case, you may now be able to make your own popcorn chicken without infringing. How exciting.
Of course, for some of us, this still seems ridiculous. Is the progress of the "useful arts" really being promoted by giving a monopoly to someone figuring out new and different ways for fast food joints to chop up their chickens?
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
** stone silence **
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Making comments that rock is my role.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Those sediments had better be chicken-free or you're gonna get sued for patent violation.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
And PUHLEAZE!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
OK
I got a million of them.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Haters gonna hate
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Haters gonna hate
Mind you, I'm sure it has to be cooked in a very particular manner, like most steak cuts. You can screw up a flank stake with less than 1 minute of over or under ;-)
It is probably a very tough muscle, and or very sinewy.
No, I do not support patent-ability of this.
Also, one of the creepier professions one can think of.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
A method in accordance with the method?! How the frick does that circular BS make any sense?! How about a method to obtain infinite free energy made in accordance with the method?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Uhhhh
I thought the entire point of patents is that the public gets to know how to do something in exchange for granting a limited-time monopoly to the creator . . .
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uhhhh
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uhhhh
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Uhhhh
People probably do it by accident, but they just call it "dinner".
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uhhhh
The patents are already granted. The inventions are already protected.
By refusing to demonstrate, he is really admitting that the patent doesn't allow one skilled in the art (of butchery) to use the invention. He is admitting that his specific skill and or practice are also required.
In other words, the "invention" must also be taught to one skilled in the art, beyond reading and applying what is in the patent.
Not that we should be patenting cooking techniques. A special knife maybe, but he's using a bog standard butchering knife.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
One part of me appreciates how to creatively cut a piece of meat, and understands how top chefs keep their recipes closely guarded, but another part of me is disgusted that cuts of meat were patented and this jerk expects royalty payments or licensing fees to use it. Imagine if we had to pay 10c to boil an egg every time we were hungry.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Depending upon what it is they have done, the answer is "Of course. Why do you even ask?"
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Damned pirates!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds like entrapment. Delicious, delicious entrapment.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Correction (I'm patenting the "Edit Post" button - GRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!):
Damned pirates!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
(And I'm patenting making assholes rich!)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
C'mon post!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Let me guess. You live on Nantucket Island and have large ear-holes or a needle-d...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
If only we knew.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Is that really chicken?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Just wondering
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not a patent about a recipe (that is a sideline). The real patent is on the machinery and method by which the chicken is turned into the parts required. It's no different from a patent on any other mechanical device.
Once again, a slow golf clap for Mike Masnick, who fails to understand the patent system, but sure can take a dump on it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You are illiterate and only look at pictures
Patent 5,346,711 is not a patent for any mechanical device. It is just directions on where to cut meat by hand with a knife.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You are illiterate and only look at pictures
He's still not patenting a machine that first used animals on treadmills to run, just ways to use the machine ;)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
It worries me...
;-)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
chicken coops
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment