Small coffee roaster prevails in Charbucks vs. Starbucks lawsuit

A U.S. District Court has affirmed lower court rulings against Starbucks, which has claimed since 1997 that family-owned Black Bear Micro Roastery has infringed on its trademark with Black Bear's "Charbucks" roast.

The attorney who has been working for free for the New Hampshire roaster insists that "there really is no harm that can be inflicted on Starbucks by this tiny little company in Tuftonboro" using the name Charbucks.

Starbucks' response:

"We only filed the suit after a prolonged, but unsuccessful attempt to enlist Black Bear's cooperation and to resolve this matter without litigation. We are currently reviewing the ruling."

* Roaster of "Charbucks" beans prevails vs. Starbucks

From 2005: Starbucks loses battle with Charbucks roaster (summary only)

Comments

[Denise]

My guess is they'll probably go after Starbread Bakery next because they use the word 'star' in the same green letters and serve coffee there. http://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/KKFf4AzNf-WFmJP4U1EDcw?select=AFq95bgRiQYmusfnGhcdOA

[peterjax]

Maybe Starbucks will file suit against the Battlestar Galactica next.

[Waltie]

I don't see anything wrong with Starbucks trying to protect themselves against what they see is a danger to their brand. I mean... a coffee that's called charbucks? I have no idea how we lost that one. That would be like if you opened an animation studio called "Dalt Wisney."

[Herman]

Trademark Law 101 - if you don't defend it, you are going to lose it and then everybody is free to carp all over it.

[hearbutloud]

It's basic brand protection, not a question of competition. Starbucks needs smarter lawyers on this.

[Melpomene]

Waltie--

Don't you ever get tired? It just must be exhausting...but hey, whatever pays the bills.

[me]

i love waltie.. he lives in the real world

[wasatec]

They have a bad record on brand protection, or what they see as brand protection. It's like Nissan suing the guy who owns nissan.com. Nissan is his last name. Or even better, Starbucks suing a Monastery over their trademark of the words "Christmas Blend". They lost that one too.

[Waltie]

Nissan can't sue a guy who was born with the name Nissan. But if he tries to open a car company, then they would have a legitimate legal action. If somebody creates a coffee with a name that's intentionally supposed to rhyme with Starbucks, I think Starbucks has to right to attempt to stop them.

[nothappyanymore]

This case isn't closed yet. I can't see them actually winning, nor should they.

[wasatec]

actually watie - Nissan Motors did sue a guy who's last name was Nissan and who owns the url www.nissan.com. (Look it up - here's the story @ www.digest.com/ ) That's why I brought it up. Maybe they should sue the heirs of Herman Melville or the town of Starbuck, WA.