Food's Biggest Scam: In the U.S., "Kobe" beef is really “Faux-be” (you can't buy Japanese beef here)

[Amerigo Vespucci]

These are cuts of the famous Kobe beef from Hyogo prefecture in Japan. Note the exquisite marbling of fat throughout. To see it in person, you need to go to Japan, because real Kobe beef cannot be found in the U.S. Photo: Wikipedia

Think you’ve tasted the famous Japanese Kobe beef?

Think again.

Of course, there are a small number of you out there who have tried it – I did, in Tokyo, and it is delicious. If you ever go to Japan I heartily recommend you splurge, because while it is expensive, it is unique, and you cannot get it in the United States. Not as steaks, not as burgers, certainly not as the ubiquitous “Kobe sliders” at your trendy neighborhood “bistro.”

You cannot buy Japanese Kobe beef in this country. Not in stores, not by mail, and certainly not in restaurants. No matter how much you have spent, how fancy a steakhouse you went to, or which of the many celebrity chefs who regularly feature “Kobe beef” on their menus you believed, you were duped. I’m really sorry to have to be the one telling you this, but no matter how much you would like to believe you have tasted it, if it wasn’t in Asia you almost certainly have never had Japan’s famous Kobe beef.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryolmsted/2012/04/12/foods-biggest-scam-the-great-kobe-beef-lie/

[veganlush]

1. I don't eat anything that

requires animal torture.

[Hawkowl]

11. +1 nt

[Confusious]

12. Might read up on it though

The cattle that make Kobe beef get only the best grains and a regular massage.

If that's torture, I want some.

[Mojorabbit]

2. I ate it when I lived in Japan. Melt in your mouth dinner. nt

[MADem]

3. So, it's not burgers on the grille at a famous basketball player's house, then?

Funny--K and P are doing a bit about "Kobe beef" right now!

[kristopher]

4. What a crock

That's like criticizing people for using the derivative term "walkman" when referring to a highly portable cassette tape player in the late 80s. The original Sony Walkman became the generic name for the technology.

It happens all the time with all kinds of products. It isn't ripping the "branding" off when culture needs a universally understood word to describe a piece of beef from a cow that is raised in a very specific way and has a certain set of desirable characteristics - it is simply part of the natural evolution of language.

[Odin2005]

6. The EU goes into a hissy fit anytime sparkling wine is called 'champagne"...

...unless it's actually from the Champagne region of France. Ditto with Black Forest ham and Parma ham.

[Luminous Animal]

9. I appreciate that. (Though, I like Prosecco & Cava just as much)...

But, when my husband buys jamón ibérico he likes to know that the ham he is eating in the U.S. is produced under the same standards as the ham he purchases in Spain.

[intaglio]

13. Wrong, utterly wrong

No manufacturer would be allowed to call their portable cassette recorder a "Walkman" no vacuum cleaner manufacturer can call their product a "Hoover" and no mobile phone manufacturer can call their product an iPhone, Sony, the Hoover Corporation and Apple go to great lengths to protect the trademarked names - and prosecute. Product reviewers are well aware that if they use the term "hoover" or "iphone" to describe another make of cleaner or touch screen phone, then they will get a take down letter from the lawyers almost before they have stopped typing. Corporations take trademarked names very seriously because copying by incompetents will destroy their reputation and use of the name as generic allows competitors to eat at your market share.

If you think this applies only to manufactured goods, try using the term "Google" (capitalised or uncapitalised) as a verb in a commercial setting. Reed-Elsevier got a take down letter from Google's lawyers about "New Scientist" using the verb, I believe you can say "we used Google," but not "we googled," but I bet you do not see the difference.

By saying that they are all "the generic name" means you are do not mind being ripped off by US producers who are only interested in fooling you. There would be nothing wrong with producers of Italian style hard cheeses calling their product "Parmisan" but by using the term "Parmigiano-Reggiano" they are lying to you. US producers are only too happy to take down foreign producers using trademarked names, consider "Bourbon" whiskey and then consider the abominations produced in the US under the name of "Scotch" (although some Scots producers do a fine job of abusing their national drink).

In relation to Kobe you did not read the entirety of the full set of articles, did you? The author was clear that the US produced "Kobe" and "Wagyu" are not raised in the same way, or on the same forage or in the same conditions, they are not even from the same breed of cattle (in the case of Kobe). What you are saying to the food producers is "Kick me again, I love it"

Oh, and if you think that this is unimportant I have but one question; who invented the incandescent lamp (light bulb)?

[kristopher]

14. No, I'm saying that the author hasn't got a clue about how language works.

It isn't a matter of trademark infringement, it is a matter of cultural adoption of a term. The mystique surrounding "Kobe" beef is a classic example of artificially created economic scarcity to inflate the price of a product. The actual value added to by that "branding" versus the actual level of product quality is completely disproportionate and is designed to serve the interests of the producers not the consumers.

[intaglio]

15. And I'm saying you have no idea about how intellectual property works

Private use fine, public use not. Use on a menu or a price list to deceive you, the purchaser, is NOT Ok. Anywhere else in the world using the term "Kobe" in the way US producers do is considered deceptive and unfair trade practice - because that is what it is.

Additionally the "Kobe" beef produced in the USA is not produced in the same way. It does not use the same cattle, it does not use the same forage, it does not have the same trace elements in the feed, it does not have to conform to any code of animal treatment; so how is it "Kobe"?

I gave examples but you ignored them, just as you ignored the bulk of the original articles. Please read in full before issuing fatuous comments.

[Odin2005]

5. The article is confusing,I don't get why it's not allowed to be imported here.

[tammywammy]

7. USDA restrictions due to foot and mouth disease.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/content/2010/05/japan_beef_vs.shtml

[Odin2005]

10. Ah, OK!

[Poll_Blind]

8. Very interesting series of articles. They're not about beef. They're about America.

PB