Should the Coca-Cola Recipe Be Protected Under IP Law?

Stance

Against — beyond ordinary trade secret rules, the recipe should not receive copyright/patent-like exclusivity.

• Jurisdiction focus: Mixed (UK/EU/US/TRIPS).
• Word budget target: ~750 words.
• Must-use anchors: TRIPS Art 39 (trade secrets), EU Trade Secrets Directive 2016/943, Kewanee Oil v. Bicron (US), Bonito Boats v. Thunder Craft (US), Feist (US), Baker v. Selden (US).

(Aryan's note: ask whether trade secrets would be considered part of IP law or not and thus whether the first point would stand.)

Definitions (tight, stance-aware)

• Recipe (Coca-Cola): A functional compilation of ingredients/process steps that yields a taste/characteristic product; not an expressive work but a method of production.
• IP protection (here): Exclusive, third-party-enforceable rights (e.g., patent, copyright, sui generis "recipe right") that go beyond contractual secrecy.
• Trade secret: Non-public, commercially valuable information protected against misappropriation (breach of confidence, theft) but not against independent discovery or reverse engineering.
• Quid pro quo of patent: Time-limited exclusivity in exchange for enabling disclosure; the bargain fails if you keep it secret and demand exclusivity.

These definitions steer you to argue: Coca-Cola already gets trade secret protection; demanding more (patent-like exclusivity without disclosure) breaks IP's design.