> Congress specifically doesn’t want grandmas getting sued for copying the recipe on the box.

Recipes don't have a specific exception within the the copyright law that Congress has carved out.

It is also not cut and dry. It basically boils down to facts not being copyrightable. So a list of ingredients and basic instructions (e.g. cooking time and temperature) won't be granted copyright protection.

But, the prose in the instructions can be copyrighted. So copying a whole recipe verbatim can be copyright infringement, but copying the list of ingredients and writing out the basic instructions is not.

Sounds like a job for LLMs - extract ingredients and steps, then verbalize it back in a completely different style.

But to what end? SEO optimized recipe copy sites already exist and are so numerous to the point where going to specific sites or books is now just a signal of reputability in a sea of trash.

not sure what Congress has to do with a case in the UK

fair use is mostly a US concept, there is no such thing in the UK or most other countries

It seems like UK and EU agree that you cannot copyright a recipe other than maybe the exact way it was written:

https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2020/uk/intellectual-pr...

https://www.copyright.eu/docs/protection-of-a-recipe/

Though you can patent novel methods of food production, which is also true in the US.

The root statement is still the same, legislatures can amend copyright laws as they wish if they really care. I don’t know that the UK parliament is exactly functioning well right now, but that’s my impression from across the pond.

> I don’t know that the UK parliament is exactly functioning well right now

in terms of ability to legislate it works considerably better than the US congress

up to you if you call that well functioning

You can only copyright the actual expression of a recipe as a literary work, but the functional aspect, the cake let's say, isn't copyrightable.