OpinionA US bakery tried to trademark mochi muffins and failed – rightfully. Not every food creation needs to be trademarked
- California-based Third Culture Bakery trademarked ‘mochi muffin’ but recently released it after intense backlash that led to news stories and bad reviews
- Not every food creation needs to be trademarked – La Viña burnt Basque cheesecake is copied the world over, but food lovers know where to find the original
What’s the deal with mochi muffins?
As innocuous as something so adorably named seems, the sweet treat has had the United States baking community up in arms in recent weeks, as California-based Third Culture Bakery attempted to trademark the item – and then backtracked after a savage backlash.
The baked good is an update on the more familiar muffin using glutinous rice flour instead of wheat; Third Culture Bakery’s version, which came onto the market in 2014, uses California-grown mochiko flour for a pleasant, bouncy chew, as well as French-style butter, pandan and coconut milk. The recipe was inspired by creator Sam Butarbutar’s Indonesian roots – a culture where chewy rice flour sweets are common.
But the question of who owns a creation such as the mochi muffin is stickier business. Under US law, recipes cannot be trademarked, nor can generic food names – it’s why a brand like Cheez-It could be trademarked, whereas “cheese crackers” could not.
Closer to home, trademarking “yakitori” would never fly in Hong Kong, but “Yakifrenchy” (that’s French-style yakitori, obviously) is now an officially protected concept in a certain upscale restaurant in Central.