Paula Forbes exposes a quiet but profound theft occurring in the digital realm: the systematic scraping of cookbooks to train artificial intelligence, stripping authors of credit and compensation while erasing the human culture embedded in their work. Unlike fiction, where the loss of plot or character is abstract, the unauthorized use of culinary texts threatens to sever the link between food, history, and the communities that sustain them. This is not merely a copyright dispute; it is an assault on the very definition of foodways.
The Theft of Foodways
Forbes begins by noting the sheer scale of the issue, highlighting the Books3 dataset used by OpenAI, which contains nearly 200,000 books. She writes, "I was upset that my work is being used without permission or payment—not to mention the fact that my book, The Austin Cookbook, features recipes from restaurants and chefs who are not being compensated, either." This observation shifts the blame from a solitary author to a broader ecosystem of exploitation, implicating the restaurants and chefs whose labor is also being digitized without consent.
The core of Forbes' argument is that cookbook authors face a unique vulnerability compared to their fiction-writing counterparts. While fiction authors can argue about the theft of narrative voice, cookbook writers are fighting for the protection of cultural heritage. Forbes explains, "The thing that burns me about this situation for cookbook authors is our work doesn't just teach AI how to concept, structure, and write a cookbook... it also teaches foodways, dishes, culture, history." This distinction is crucial. It suggests that when an algorithm learns to write a recipe, it is not just mimicking syntax; it is ingesting the history of a people, often without acknowledging the source.
"AI can't taste, touch, or smell, which will always give the human recipe developers a leg up. That is, of course, unless they are literally using our recipes."
Critics might argue that recipes are functional instructions and that the data is necessary for technological advancement, but Forbes counters this by emphasizing the human element that cannot be replicated by code. She notes that while the Authors Guild is suing, their class action is currently limited to fiction writers, leaving nonfiction authors in a legal limbo. This gap in labor protection is a significant vulnerability in the current legal framework.
The Fragility of Culinary Intellectual Property
Forbes brings in the perspective of fellow authors to illustrate the specific legal and existential threats they face. Jamie Feldmar, who found her book in the dataset, points out the inherent weakness of current protections: "One of the reasons it's so infuriating is because there are already so few protections for cookbook authors—you can't copyright a recipe, so your IP always feels like it's at risk." This admission underscores a long-standing frustration in the culinary world: the inability to own the ideas behind a dish, which makes the unauthorized scraping of entire books even more egregious.
Carolyn Phillips adds a philosophical dimension to the debate, questioning the value of machine-generated food. She asks, "Who wants recipes written by something that thinks in zeros and ones, that has never tasted a strawberry or a glass of wine, that has no concept of food or eating?" Forbes uses this quote to anchor her argument that the soul of cooking is inextricably linked to human experience. The argument here is not just about economics, but about the degradation of culture into mere data points.
However, a counterargument worth considering is that AI could democratize access to culinary techniques, potentially helping those who cannot afford cookbooks. Yet, Forbes and the authors she cites suggest that this potential benefit does not justify the theft of the original creators' work. The lack of a powerful labor organization for cookbook authors, unlike the Writers Guild of America for screenwriters, leaves them exposed to these technological shifts without a collective voice.
A New Wave of Human-Centric Cooking
Despite the looming threat of automation, the piece pivots to a celebration of the enduring power of human creativity in the cookbook world. Forbes highlights a slate of upcoming titles that emphasize personal history, cultural identity, and the tactile nature of food. From Polina Chesnakova's exploration of Soviet diaspora cooking to Azikiwee Anderson's mission to make sourdough accessible, these projects are deeply rooted in human experience.
The commentary on book covers by Frances Abrantes Baca further reinforces this theme. The analysis of Susan Spungen's Veg Forward and Leslie Lennox's Pesto focuses on how design and photography evoke sensory experiences that a machine cannot replicate. Forbes writes, "Hunger—both literal and metaphorical—is stirred when gazing upon these images..." This section serves as a reminder that the value of a cookbook lies not just in the instructions, but in the emotional and sensory connection it fosters with the reader.
The upcoming releases, such as The Fishwife Cookbook and Eat Jewish, promise to continue this tradition of storytelling through food. These books are not just collections of ingredients; they are narratives of identity, family, and place. As Forbes notes, the visual and textual elements of these books work together to create a "handsome pair" that captures the essence of the recipes within.
Bottom Line
Paula Forbes' commentary effectively reframes the AI copyright debate from a legal technicality to a cultural crisis, arguing that the theft of cookbooks is an erasure of history and community. The piece's strongest element is its focus on the unique vulnerability of nonfiction authors, who lack the legal protections and labor organizations available to their fiction-writing peers. The biggest vulnerability in the current landscape is the absence of a unified front among cookbook authors to demand fair compensation and credit, a gap that the executive branch and legal system have yet to address. Readers should watch for the outcome of pending lawsuits and the potential for new legislation to protect nonfiction creators in the age of artificial intelligence.