Starbucks Corp cannot stop “Charbucks”, a family-owned New Hampshire roaster from selling coffee, because the circuit judge states that Starbucks failed to prove if this “blurring” of Starbucks would confuse consumers.

Charbucks is recognized as only weakly related to the ” Starbucks trademark.” Nonetheless, for Starbucks, their association is much stronger. This is mainly demonstrated by a phone survey of 600 people. Majority people associate the name “Charbucks” with the brand “Starbucks”.

The conclusion is rejected later on, stating that while some participants think of “Starbucks” when hearing “Charbucks”, only 4.4% agrees that “Starbucks” sells “Charbucks” product, which demonstrates that two are only minimally similar.

This case is very interesting, since it demonstrates the importance of brand, which we learnt in class. Brand identifies one seller’s product different from those of other sellers. International companies, as well as companies which sells premium or luxury products, often file trademark lawsuits even against small rivals, in this case, “Charbucks”, a small and family-owned business. One of the main reasons is that the reputation of “Starbucks” might be damaged, which worth billions.

Another interesting point is the dissimilarity between how the different products appear in commerce and are seen by consumers.

Hyperlink: http://www.torontosun.com/2013/11/17/starbucks-loses-charbucks-appeal