There is a fine line drawn in the sand right now. One side of it is impersonation of a billion dollar company which damages their reputation. On the other, is completely legal business practice for one’s own benefit.  After reading the story of Starbucks vs Charbucks I could not help but think about the recent battle between Trader Joes  (a large grocery chain in the united states) and Pirate Joes (a specialty grocery store open in Vancouver).http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/trader-joe-s-loses-fight-with-vancouver-s-pirate-joe-s-1.1912400

My initial reaction to this was something along the lines of these large companies are doing nothing but bullying the self-proclaimed “little guy”. How could one little store seriously affect the profits of a large corporation such as Starbucks or Trader Joes?  The Simple answer is that it cannot, however, soon enough another store will pop up, and then another one, and before you know it there is a Pirate Joes or Charbucks products in each city or province. This is why these large companies are heavily pursuing law suits and I fully agree with it. The recent over rulings in court are putting these large companies at huge risk as it now sets a precedent. The line has to be drawn in the sand.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/us-business/starbucks-loses-bid-to-stop-charbucks-from-selling-coffee/article15464560/