Doesn’t sound any better tasting the Starbucks
Starbucks is charred, so I can see the mistake.
I’m surprised the big company didn’t get their way. Disney Inc. will stop at nothing to protect all their little Mickey’s and images thereof. McDonalds, also aggressively protective. Maybe any such protection only last for X number of years, like a patent.
Still waiting for the Herman Melville case to wind it’s way through the courts.
Here in Russia, the Burberry brand is (of course) very prestigious.
There are a lot of companies that play on the name:
1. Cheeseberry’s - cafe featuring cheesecake.
2. Shashlikberry’s - a cafe selling shashlik (Russian BBQ)
3. Borschberry’s - a cafe selling traditional Russian food.
4. Rakberry’s -boiled crawfish takeout (rak = crawfish in Russian)
I’m thinking of opening a coffee shop named Starstrucks.
Why anyone would take as a brand name the nickname given Starbucks on the basis of their always overroasting their coffee is beyond me.
Still, after the absurd trademark decision won by North Face against the parody clothing line “South Butt” (rendered by a judge who can’t tell north from south, right from left (the two curved regions making a stylized butt were on the right, while the three curved regions of the North Face logo are on the left), or a face from a butt), it’s good to see parody branding being upheld.
Well, Starbucks stole their name from a Herman Melville character, so I don’t think have any grounds.
Since Starbucks tastes like burned s*** anyway, Charbucks is a more accurate name.
La Colombe. the only way to brew.
(the co-founder Todd Charmichael calls it Charbucks all the time, and I wholly agree :) )