Starbucks Vs The DoubleShot Coffee Company For Naming Rights
Published April 03, 2006
Usually I am very pro-business. I believe business is the lifeblood of the American economy. Our ability to open a business is the cornerstone of American success. That we can use our own money, sweat, and hard work to get ahead is what makes capitalism work. Wal-Mart started as a small mom and pop; Kmart and Starbucks did, too.
But when these companies grow and start to use their strength to crush competition and threaten the very institution of small business that drives this country, then something has to be done.
Stores like Wal-Mart threaten small business through their ultra-low prices and selection, but Starbucks is a great example of a true corporate bully. The way many people view Starbucks as a bully is through it's use of litigation or threat of litigation against its competition.
Some recent examples are quite shocking. You've probably heard of some of them. Recently they shut down an independent company named after its owner, Sam Buck, causing her to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees to Starbucks. She is also required to change the name of her small shop.
They also attempted to stop a brewer from selling a beer called Star Bock. For those of you who don't know, Bock is a type of strong lager.
Another recent suit involved a small roaster who had a very dark roast called Charbucks.
We also can't forget the artist who parodied the Starbucks siren, or HaidaBucks, a small sandwich shop in a remote section of Canada whose name, Starbucks claimed, was a "confusing variation."
And my favorite annoying stupid lawsuit, threatening legal action for linking to the Starbucks website.
Fortunately for Star Bock, HaidaBucks, and Charbucks, Starbucks did not win. But that did not stop them from incurring legal fees that nearly bankrupted them.
A small privately owned company with half a dozen employees does not have the money that a company like Starbucks has at its disposal for legal and court costs. Sometimes just the threat of a lawsuit can wield results.
The most recent target of the ire of Starbucks is a small independent coffee shop and roaster of ultra-premium coffees located in Tulsa, Oklahoma. DoubleShot Coffee Company recently received a letter asking it to change the name of the store. It turns out the name DoubleShot Coffee Company is close to the name of a Starbucks product. Starbucks Doubleshot is an espresso and milk drink served in cans and sold at convenience stores and supermarkets. The similarities end there.
- Starbucks Vs The DoubleShot Coffee Company For Naming Rights
- Published: April 03, 2006
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Tastes
- Filed Under: Culture: Business and Economics, Tastes: Food and Drink, Politics: Law and Rights
- Writer: Tom Bux
- Tom Bux's BC Writer page
- Tom Bux's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Thanks for the input. I hope they don't sue me is right for my last name. lol
Most disappointing behavior - shame on Starbucks! The good news is I usually get my coffee from Trader Joe's and a local place called the Coffee Mill anyway. Guess it will have to be more often now.
Luckily i live and canada... there may be starbucks everywhere here in Toronto but i prefer Tim Hortons any day of the week.
TIM HORTENs FTW!!!!!!!!
I go to this great shop in Southern Californias Orange County Area, city of Costa Mesa/Santa Ana, down here, we have a little shop called the Gipsy Den. My god....the coffee..and the tea...and the beer, not to mention live music, and belly dancers on sats :D
I have nothing really against Starbucks. Their presence has done a lot to get people interested in better coffees, alowing places like DoubleShot to exist, but that doesn't give them cart blanche to harrass people.
Starbucks has begin to invade Paris. There, they met a competitor established since 1994 and clearly publicizing that their inspiration comes from ... Starbucks (without naming them). No lawsuits yet. May be Starbucks is afraid of bad publicity that would kill their friendly image if they try to shut down their French copycat.
Starbucks has been driven from the Holy Land. The idiots burned their coffee and served stale pastries. If they had tried this bully crap in this coffee drinker's paradise, someone would have probably burned down their main store in Tel Aviv.
There are ways to deal with bullies, you know...
What Starbucks needs is a good coffee enema... IN THEIR EARS!!!
Maybe that would help them clear the crap out of their brains.
Doubleshot is a trademarked name of a coffee product. Why should someone be allowed to sell coffee under that name? If Starbucks does not defend their patents and trademarks, they loose the right to keep them. Simple as that.
But "doubleshot" is a basic term for a way of ordering an espresso. Doubleshot Coffee Company sells whole bean coffee, while Starbucks Doubleshot is a psuedo coffee drink served nationwide in grocery stores. There is a big difference.
Doubleshot Coffee has put Starbucks on the PR frying pan in Tulsa, or should I say Starbucks put themselves there.For example a teacher in a Tulsa school one block from a Starbucks told her staff the Doubleshot story.Consequently most of the teachers no longer go to Starbucks and perceive them as bullies.I imagine about 30 of them told a couple of people each.Meanwhile I visited Doubleshot Coffee in downtown Tulsa and it looks like their business is good due to all the publicity as well as their quality product.
While a fervent Starbucks fan, I sympathize with the little guy out there being beat down by the big corporate bully. Face it folks, large corporations run your every day lives. Americans have been complaining about it for years but nothing has changed and nothing will change. Americans are complacent. It would take a global event - much larger than 9/11 - to change anything in America. It seems all you can do is actions such as that above -- the teacher in Tulsa telling all her colleagues about the incident. Grass root efforts may work in a small market but sadly, not on the national stage.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/45802)
Great piece, Tom. I do love my Starbucks, but I had no idea about all this nonsense.
"Starbucks worldview is that there should be a Starbucks in every town in America"? In NYC the goal seems to be one on every block, if not more. I gather they're doing fairly well without this sort of strongarming. Shame on them--kudos to you!
PS--is Starbucks going to sue you over your name too? (lol)