Starbucks wars
Starbucks is fighting an ongoing legal battle in Asia trying to keep local coffee houses from using logos that too closely resemble the distinctive trademark of the Seattle company.
Its recent victory over “Xing Ba Ke,” a coffee house chain is Shanghai, China, made international headlines as the media, industry affiliates and governments praised the giant leap forward China was making in addressing the copyright violations in the country.
“Xing” means star in Chinese, and “Ba Ke” is meant to sound like “bucks.” However, because of the literal translation, Starbucks had already been known as “Xing Ba Ke” by its Chinese customers.In addition, the logo features a circle with green characters against a white background. The court ruled that Xing Ba Ke’s name and logo were a copyright infringement, awarding Starbucks damages amounting to more than $60,000.
Starbucks is also suing Japan’s Mt. Rainier Espresso & Milk for copyright infringement. Mt. Rainier is a mountain in Seattle,which is the home of Starbucks. The Mt. Rainier logo of the Japanese company resembles the Starbucks logo.
Starbucks legal battles have not been so successful in Korea however, where a court found in favor of a local brand against the American company.
In its decision, the court stated that despite notable similarities in design and color structure, the text between the outer and inner circles, the presence of a star on both ends, and the use of a mythological goddess in the center, the names “Starpreya” and “Starbucks,” as well as the illustrations of the goddesses themselves, were too different for Starpreya to be considered in violation of copyright law.
Specifically, Starpreya uses only the head of a goddess in the logo, while Starbucks features the entire body and even the fishtail legs of the mermaid-like character.
The court also stated that there was no danger of ever confusing Starpreya for Starbucks, despite strong similarities in their logos.
Was it the right decision? Take a look a the various logos above and judge for yourself.
Fighting copyright infringement in Asia has to be the quickest way of wasting a lot of your money.
February 23rd, 2006 at 12:21 ami once confused taiwan’s e-coffee for starbucks, but all was sorted out when i took a sip and realized i had been served coffee not urine
February 23rd, 2006 at 4:04 ami guess he’s not the only one that is confused…i don’t get major_major’s comment. is he saying starbucks’ coffee is urine or taiwan’s e-coffee is urine?
February 23rd, 2006 at 5:30 amHe’s saying Starbucks coffee is urine but I don’t know where he came up with that idea. If he’s drinking coffee in Taiwan then he probably just doesn’t know what its supposed to taste like.
February 23rd, 2006 at 6:40 amWow, a Korean court ruling in favour of the local over the durty furner. What a shock.
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:33 amI’m surprised they didn’t mention Excelsior Caffe, which, with the exception of its color scheme bears a striking resemblance logo-wise (among other things) to Starbucks, though not as much as the logos shown in the article. It always struck me as odd to see an Excelsior Caffe within walking distance from a Starbucks in Tokyo.
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:07 amI wouldn’t call Starbuck’s coffee urine; it’s far too cardboardish for that. Reminds me more of what you’d get from one of those old perculator coffee pots from the ’50s — one that hadn’t been washed out for about 9 years — if you poured some hot water in, swirled it around for a minute, then drank.
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:11 amYes, Excelsior is also what I call “nanchatte Starbucks.” I’m surprised about Mt. Rainier though, I drink that all the time and have never thought it looked like Starbucks. Um, mountain guys, vs. goddess?
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:36 amFor what it’s worth, this is trademark infringement—not copyright infringement…. Copyright is a right over literary works….
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:37 amit’s true, Starbucks are trying take over the world, just like any other American multi-national. But using a logo that closely resembles any company logo is digging your own grave, espeacially any American companies that is as wealthy as Starbucks. When they find you, they will sue you, it’s the American way.
There was recently a case in the US of a woman who is being sued for touching someone in a cinema because they wouldn’t shut up on there mobile phone, that is ridiculous. No one likes it when people talk when you are trying to watch a movie.
I think Starbucks have a pathetic case of sueing smaller coffee shops for closely resembling their logo. This is just another step of completely monopolysing the coffee shop market. An example, there is about 5 Starbucks at one mall I know of, they all used to be coffee houses.
I personally don’t drink coffee from any franchised based shops. Because I know that it is a complete rip off. The mark up of coffee is herendous. Caffiene is drug, and when it comes down to it, coffee shops are very practically shrewed drug dealers. Everyone knows at least one coffee addict that has in excess 4 cups a day, they may cost upwards of $2-3US. Now if you knew how much companies like Starbucks, Gloria Jeans and Zarraffas buy raw coffee beans from farmers in Africa and Brazil, you would be deeply appaled. They pay about a few cents per kilo of raw coffee beans. Now how much was a cup of coffee again? Are you a coffee addict? Now do the maths, and make your own decision.
February 23rd, 2006 at 5:27 pmIndeed, Jamie, I believe that Excelsior chain (operated by Doutor) has ALREADY been sued (or threatened with it) by Starbucks, and hence the color. I believe their logo used to be green too. (Anyone else remember this? Am I just confused?)
February 23rd, 2006 at 6:00 pmThere was a fake Starbucks in Qingdao (owned by a Korean), exactly the same name and logo - though anyone venturing inside would immediately know the place was a cheapo Chinese coffee shop. What I never understood was why they bothered. Very few Chinese know what Starbucks is, and those who know are not impressed by brand name coffee.
So far as tasting like urine, anyone knows there are no reputable places in Tokyo that serve urine for less than 10,000 yen a shot.
February 23rd, 2006 at 9:52 pmMt. Ranier is about 100 km southeast of Seattle, not in the city itself.
When I lived in Seattle, the locals referred to it as Charbucks. The burnt taste has definitely made its way to Japan. Now that’s quality control!
February 23rd, 2006 at 10:28 pmI like Starbux coffee, but the caffeine content is so high, I have a major buzz on all day. I prefer now to make my own coffee at home with fresh ground beans and a paper filter. No sugar. Some cream.
February 23rd, 2006 at 11:03 pmBy the way, anyone know why Starbucks uses that name: Starbucks? Was the character in Melville’s novel called John Starbuck or John Starbucks?
February 23rd, 2006 at 11:04 pmLance, I agree with you that Starbucks sucks, but actually in this case they’re not the bad guy (I know, hard to believe..) What the Chinese are doing and getting away with so easily is just sad - it’s not just coffee and electronics, they’re even doing rip-off cars and computer games now! (And more on this at The Raw Feed if you want.)
February 24th, 2006 at 8:40 amHey Duo
From the sounds of it, there seems to be a lot of rivalry between asian countries. From your point of view, you are fed up by chinese ripping off korean intellectual properties.
When I was growing up, my grandparents always told me Asian products were shoddy - because they were copied by western inventions. I know this isn’t true - if any thing technolgy has become better due to asian intellectual intervention. Another thing too, nearly all electronics are made in asia now.
I know where your opinion is coming from. No worries. But I have always known this my self and I am not surprised at all. The fact of the matter is the chinese are always going to be unoriginal and copy anything, they have done it ever since i can remember.
In Australia nearly everything is made in China - and there are no shortage of rip-off products of the real thing. It wasn’t long ago where a US aircraft was found in China, so they took it apart and copied it from circuit to circuit along with it’s structure and engines.
Sure the chinese are meticulous product copy cats. But the chinese are communist too, they make cheaper alternative for their peoples - that is the communist way. Which in the other hand being communist, modern day China is so technologial, and that’s because it so cheap. Which comes to my next point, I can’t believe how materialistic asia is now. it is all about, things… gadgets and toys and stuff that is cool - everything we don’t need.
I don’t know about you, but I didn’t grow up in wealthy family. I have always had to work for everying that I own. In the end though, I do think Starbucks still sucks . You could always make your own concept up for a coffee shop, it would be so easy to do - with money. But I think that total and utter monoplization of a market is by far worst than a few small time (compared to Starbucks) trying to make a buck or few. And when it comes down to it, you could almost say that you support Starbucks for sueing the chinese, although Starbucks sucks? I think we both went on a tangent their.
February 24th, 2006 at 3:35 pmWell I can see the government ripping stuff off with weaponry much like the Soviets used to since that’s kind of the rule of the game in that area, but now they’re covering their private industry?? Just one more indicator the wise old introspective China is gone, replaced with a nationalistic, expansionist monstrosity of a behemoth playing by it’s own rules. Same goes for Korea in a pipsqueak sort of way, comparatively.
And yes, I support Starbucks in suing the PRC. Although, that’s the one and only thing I support them in, despite the fact that they haven’t really pissed me off (and I’m actually more like totally ambivalent about them.)
February 25th, 2006 at 10:42 amIndeed!
February 25th, 2006 at 1:42 pmThere are copy cat coffee shops here in Korea too that use a logo similar to Starbucks, but so far no lawsuits have been filed against them that I have seen and these coffee shops are still going strong. Also I don’t see Starbucks being able to take the majority of market share in Korea. There are just to many coffee shops in Korea for even Starbucks to compete with.
Also I don’t even like Starbucks coffee. My favorite coffee is Dunkin Donuts coffee that costs half the price of a Starbucks coffee and there many more Dunkin Donuts in Korea to go to than Starbucks.
February 25th, 2006 at 11:51 pmMore here from BoingBoing.
February 26th, 2006 at 4:06 pmI don’t know about Starbucks, having ever been to only one (O’Hare Airport in Chicago), but one problem with these places (including Dunkin Donuts) is that so much of their product is designed for the young Asian female consumer.
I seldom drink coffee anymore, but recently went to a Tully’s near my house and ordered a cappuchino, which I used to like years ago. Much too much milk and foam, at least compared to those I used to drink in shops in the US (pre Starbucks). The overwhelming majority of the customers in these places in Japan, anyway, is women, and I think the product is made with that clientele in mind.
As for Dunkin Donuts, the ones I’ve been to here in Japan have terrible donuts! And at least the customers at the upscale coffee shops in Japan are adult women. The customers at Dunkin Donuts have a high percentage of high school girls.
February 26th, 2006 at 5:21 pmAmp,
I had the same problem with the local Tully’s out here, and mentioned to them that the taste of their cappuchino has very little to do with coffee. They told me that for 50 yen, they would add another shot of expresso. I had them do that the next time I ordered their medium cappuchino and that seemed to do the trick for me.
JP
February 26th, 2006 at 5:40 pm[...] In February, JP of Japundit noted how Starbucks was duking it out with Asian coffee houses that were using logos that resembled Starbucks’. Well, a Korean court has ruled against the global coffeehouse chain in its case against local coffee chain Starpreya, explaining that the logos just weren’t similar enough. [...]
October 11th, 2006 at 1:17 pmChina IP Protection — A Seoul Perspective
There is an assumption out there that China’s legal deck is completely stacked against Western companies. China bad. South Korea good. Starbucks just proved it is not that simple. I have handled at least 100 legal matters in Korea and
October 18th, 2006 at 8:13 pmi love starbucks coffee…so much i even got a tattoo of the logo. and its legal and i can not be sued. i called and got permission. anyways..i have had other coffee from different shops, but none of them are the same as starbucks.
May 24th, 2007 at 3:08 amChina IP Protection — A Seoul Perspective
There is an assumption out there that China’s legal deck is completely stacked against Western companies. China bad. South Korea good. Starbucks just proved it is not that simple. I have handled at least 100 legal matters in Korea an…
July 5th, 2007 at 3:50 amomg you guys are ridiculous. starbucks started out just like all the other little coffee shops, and look what its made for itself. i think that its fantastic that a tiny one store place can grow and now have millions of chains. they are not in any way monopolizing the coffee industry! are you kidding me!? look at tullys, and the billions of other little mom and pop places. if you don’t want to go to starbucks FINE! but no one wants to hear you bitch about how awful it is.
February 4th, 2008 at 7:55 pm[...] the lawsuit begun by Starbucks to get rid of such copycat brands as “Mt. Rainier” coffee in Japan, has still obviously [...]
April 16th, 2008 at 10:05 pm