Beer Plagarism

Different enough for what? You can enter any beer you brew into a competition as your own if that is what you are asking.

 

I don't think you need to worry about altering the recipe for a competition. A) none of the judges are going to see your recipe, B) It's a beer contest, not a paper you're submitting for class. Unless your contest has a specific rule about beer plagiarism, you'll be able to submit whatever you want no matter where you found the recipe. C) You're not marketing it for sale, so you don't have to worry about the brewery getting mad at you for competing with them. Given the fact that they've shared their recipes for homebrewers, I think they'd be honored if you submitted their recipe to a contest.

If you're still worried about plagiarism, keep in mind the fact that the recipe isn't the only thing that affects how a beer comes out. Differences in fermentation temperature/duration, yeast size/health, equipment and other techniques mean that three brewers can make the same recipe and get three different beers.

 

what everyone else said + those beers really arent all that similar

Differences

1. Base malt - MO vs 2row
2. Less roasted grains - 0.5 vs 1#
3. different roasted grains - Pale Choco vs BP and Choco
4. Less crystal - 0.9 vs 1.16#
5. Different crystals - 120 + 60 vs 120
6. No carapils vs 0.6# carapils
7. Different late hops - Willamette vs Columbus/Fuggles

 

Just make sure you list your sources in MLA format to avoid plagiarism.

 

I don't think plagiarism will ever be a issue with brewing. If you could nail the original the brewery would try and hire you. I've heard of breweries moving and having trouble replicating their own beers.

 

I wouldn't bother with it...

Honestly, a competition beer is all about how YOU made it and how it ended with your process. Granted a good recipe can go a long way in terms of being good, but no one is gonna say, "Damn, I wonder what recipe this is, it's almost like he took KBS and poured it into a bigger bottle and put his name on it.. "

 

Virtually every beer I brew is inspired by something I've had before - either a commercial beer, a fellow homebrewer's, or a twist on one of my own . I suspect that's true of most homebrews. Go for it! It could be a clone recipe. But as long as you brewed it, it's a legitimate entry.

 

Recipe's are a dime a dozen. If you can brew another breweries beer with their recipe congrats. You made a great beer on your own and deserve the rights to it.

 

I always try to consult recipes of beers that inspire me before I brew. I'll let ingredient availability and personal whims alter the recipe. I don't see the shame.

 

Enter it and get a medal. Hang the medal on the walls of your man-cave/brewhaus.

 

There is no such thing as beer plagiarism. Think about a style like czech pilsner. Every recipe is essentially the same. If you don't "plagiarize" the basic recipe, you're not brewing a czech pilsner. Most styles have more room for variation, but I think the principle is the same: recipes within a given style tend vary only in the details. If they vary in the entire concept of the beer and its make-up, then you're probably brewing a different style.

Which is one reason I think great brewing is all about process. Great recipes can be had for free by the hundreds on the internet. But not everyone can turn those into great beers.

 

no the proper format is from the chicago book of style

 

Recipes are ingredients, which you listed, and the procedure to process. Why do breweries put recipes out there? Homebrewers don't have the equivalent equipment and procedures to reproduce the beer exactly. We can get close.

It is a beer competition, not a recipe contest. Brew a beer that hits the style and is free of flaws.

 

Plagiarism doesn't exist when you have to craft it yourself. It's called "homage," and the purest form of flattery.

 

There are other takes on this, particularly among Belgian brewers, where the concept of style is pretty loosey goosey and really exists more for the sake of beer competitions rather than something that has been historically acknoowledged, as far as I can tell. Sometimes I've read/heard Belgian brewers admonishing people who ask recipe details, encouraging them to do something original rather than copy. Certainly nothing wrong with trying to do something original, but as a homebrewer, one of the things I want to do is make something like the Belgian beers that I love but can seldom find and afford. Still, I almost never find myself strictly adhering to clone recipes for the reasons I mentioned earlier.

 

I just had this conversation with my neighbor. He has a chimay clone that is pretty tasty, and I am pushing him to enter it into a competition that is free next month. He keeps telling me it's cheating because he used a recipe, I keep telling him that he brewed it and that's all that matters. I stand by that. How many chefs make something with the exact same ingredients that taste completely different?

I say enter it. You brewed it, and even if it was a perfect clone, so what? Tasty and Jamil enter clones (based off of banter on CYBI) in competitions too.

 

I haven't listened to CYBI in a while, but I thought both Jamil and Tasty have retired from homebrew competitions. Jamil has a brewery to work in, and he may be entering pro competitions with brewery beers. Anyone know?

 

Recipes are the least important aspect of brewing-process and technique are far more important. On another forum around 40 of us got together and formulated a recipe, sent it to Austin Homebrew and they made kits for all of us to buy so the ingredients would be as identical as possible. Then after everybody brewed and conditioned the beer we each sent 2 bottles to 3 different participants for comparison. Nobody not associated with the project would have even figured out these beers fell into the same style classification, they were all over the map in terms of clarity, flavor and general quality.