‘Starbung’ coffee vendor settles name dispute out of court

The Starbung name is derived from ‘Bung’, the nickname of owner Damrong Maslae, who says he chose the green colour scheme because he is a Muslim.BUSINESS & TRADEMARK

Starbucks sues street vendor for B300,000

18/10/2013

Online reporters

The global coffee chain Starbucks is suing a Bangkok street vendor for 300,000 baht for copying its famous green logo on his ‘Starbung’ coffee cart

In its Trademark Act violation complaint against Damrong Maslae, Starbucks Corp is also demanding a monthly payment of 30,000 baht plus legal fees

The US-based chain says the vendor has designed his own trademark in a way that is similar to Starbucks, featuring a round logo and dark green background with a human figure inside the circle.

The brand name, Starbung (“Bung” is Mr Damrong’s nickname), is also written in capital letters and placed in the same position as the Starbucks name on its logo

According to a report by ASTV Manager, Starbucks filed a petition with the Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court, seeking the arrest of Mr Damrong and his younger brother Damras Maslae, as well as financial compensation The court set a trial date for Nov 4.

For the full report, click on

http://www.bangkokpost.com/learning/learning-from-news/375260/starbungs-vs-starbucks-billion-dollar-corporation-vs-street-vendor

—

ANOTHER IMITATOR

starwars-coffee-logo | Flickr – Photo Sharing!www.flickr.com – 630 × 640 – Search by imagePage by Josh Hull

30 Clever Logo Parodies of Famous Brandswww.hongkiat.com

—

I see Starbung Coffee is still on Phra Athit Rd. I thought they received a cease & desist from Starbucks pic.twitter.com/YX6tunO99r

12:36 AM – 20 Apr 13 from location—

THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME STARBUCKS HAS SUED FOR TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT.

…

SUNSTEIN

Starbucks Absorbs Another Loss in Its Long Trademark Battle with Charbucks

By Steven Abreu. A member of our Trademark Practice Group

No doubt about it: It is hard for brand owners to protect against trademark dilution, even with a name as famous as STARBUCKS. With its decision in Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee, Inc., a federal court in Manhattan has yet again served a bitter brew to the coffee chain in this 14-year dispute.

In 1997, Black Bear Micro Roastery began marketing its premium dark roast coffee under the name “Black Bear Mr. Charbucks Blend Coffee.” Not surprisingly, Starbucks objected to Black Bear’s use of “CHARBUCKS,” and eventually sued the New Hampshire roaster for both trademark infringement and trademark dilution in a 2001 lawsuit.

In 2005, the court handed Starbucks its first defeat in the suit, ruling that the use of CHARBUCKS resulted in no actual dilution under federal trademark law. The next year, Congress passed the Trademark Dilution Revision Act (TDRA), which significantly eased the burden of proof on a brand owner.  Now, the owner of a famous mark is required to show only that the defendant’s mark is likely to cause dilution.

The court of appeals asked the trial court to reconsider Starbucks’s claim under the new law, specifically whether dilution by “blurring” had occurred. Diluting a mark by blurring it means impairing its distinctiveness.
…

In a second rejection of Starbucks’s claims, the trial court determined, among other things, that blurring did not occur because the marks were not substantially similar.
…

In the most recent development, the district court…. concluded that dilution by blurring had not been proven because the marks are only minimally similar and, based on the results of a survey, only “weakly associated in consumers’ minds.”

Read the full article in

http://sunsteinlaw.com/starbucks-absorbs-another-loss-in-its-long-trademark-battle-with-charbucks/

—