STARBUCKS EXPANSION PLANS HALTED - BY A TRADE MARK


Seattlepi.com reports on the representative of the owner owner of the Russian Starbucks trade mark – Sergei Zukyov. Although the American Starbucks company filed its name as a trade mark in 1997, the mark was cancelled for non-use. This allowed the company Zukyov represents to step in and register the mark. Now it is asking for $600,000 for the mark to be handed over to the American company. Zukyov takes the attitude that while this type of activity isn’t fair, it is legal.

The Starbucks trade mark on the moon is still up for grabs - for the moment...

The IPKat is somewhat ambivalent on this issue. On the one hand, the need for “use” to maintain registration is sensible. On the other hand, overzealous application of the requirement can allow third parties to take advantage of unused famous marks or pushes famous mark-owners into entering markets before they are ready to do so. The IPKat suspects that the answer lies in protection against bad faith registration. Not only are such third parties registering with the intent to take advantage of the earlier mark, but also, they do not have bona fide intent to use the famous mark as a trade marks for the goods or services for which it is registered.
STARBUCKS EXPANSION PLANS HALTED - BY A TRADE MARK STARBUCKS EXPANSION PLANS HALTED - BY A TRADE MARK Reviewed by Unknown on Thursday, October 13, 2005 Rating: 5

3 comments:

  1. Not so sure it is legal!
    The starbucks logo contains a nice little copyright work to which the 3rd party registering the mark does not have title.
    Copyright infringement in the documents applying for the mark to start with, plus bad faith etc etc.
    Starbucks would be able to successfully oppose that type of application in the UK, if the mark involved a copyright work to which the applicant had no rights.

    The IP Dog.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Also Russia is a signatory to the Paris Convention, and so may well protect the Starbucks mark as well known mark (assuming that American culture has pervaded Russia enough to make Starbucks well known, of course).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Agreed on both points - the IPKat was merely reporting the words of Mr Zukyov

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.