Scholarlink

<p>This article offers a feminist reading of decisions relating to two substitute animal food patents from the European Patent Office, <i>Cheese Analogue/Avebe</i> and <i>Meat Substitute/Impossible Foods</i>. This is contextualised within the history of the patentability of food and of recipes, and analyses the Opposition Division and Boards of Appeal decisions of both patents in relation to the requirement that an invention is sufficiently disclosed, supported and non-obvious, and how one provides evidence for food-related inventions. In particular, the article notes the change in language used to patent food compared to the language of recipes, the willingness to have uncertainty in either the starting materials or the end product of processed foods compared to traditional recipes, and the patent system’s acceptance of measures and professions that are created to ostensibly give quantitative credence to food-related characteristics constituting “technical effects”.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A Feminist Reading of Substitute Animal Food Patent Decisions: Of Cheating Cheeses and Mock Meats

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月1日

查看全文
  • Jessica C. Lai

摘要

This article offers a feminist reading of decisions relating to two substitute animal food patents from the European Patent Office, Cheese Analogue/Avebe and Meat Substitute/Impossible Foods. This is contextualised within the history of the patentability of food and of recipes, and analyses the Opposition Division and Boards of Appeal decisions of both patents in relation to the requirement that an invention is sufficiently disclosed, supported and non-obvious, and how one provides evidence for food-related inventions. In particular, the article notes the change in language used to patent food compared to the language of recipes, the willingness to have uncertainty in either the starting materials or the end product of processed foods compared to traditional recipes, and the patent system’s acceptance of measures and professions that are created to ostensibly give quantitative credence to food-related characteristics constituting “technical effects”.