Bangkok: Starbucks demands arrests in IP case

[Curt1591]

Starbucks need to get over themselves and extract their head from their collective corporate arse.

The only humorous thing Starbucks is hearing Americans rave on about how good the coffee is. Most of the world wouldn't even degrease their car engines with the stuff.

This is "Starbucks Thailand" taking this action.

[avidflyer]

One more reason to NOT use Starbucks products.

[Lonewolf77]

Starbucks have to protect there brand, it will be like opening a hamburger shop and using the yellow "M" in your business name.

[Zodaka]

Had Starbung not announced earlier its intentions to expand via franchises and part ownerships this wouldve probably been ignored. Starbung intends to list on MAI within five years too.

[Songhua]

The Starbung business will never take off. They don't have wifi.

[Woodsie888]

Isn't imitation considered the highest form of flattery?

Starbucks the U.S. coffee chain should pay the men THB.300,000 plus interest for the publicity they have generated for Starbucks.

Just check out the business ethics of Starbucks, indeed somewhat lacking in ethics.

Exactly, they should buy the business and start opening Mobile Starbuck's if they feel their business is being compromised so much by these two.

[Westaurel]

In the country of counterfeit goods it's not surprise me. But they still can reconvert themselves in t-shirts parody they would maybe sell more and with less damage for the big group who it's normal protecting their logo, brand and intellectual property !

Edited October 18, 2013 by Westaurel

[shaurene]

The only ones, that should be arrested here, are the bosses of Starbucks for overcharging the brown liquid, they call coffee!!

You have a choice buy it or not. The names of these copy guys sound a bit Indian or Middle East type. And who gives a shit how many kids they have, they are breaking a registered name law.

Put your self in Starbucks shoes they have spent a lot of money to protect their product name they have a right to the protection.

You must admit it is a great tasting coffee, I buy it because I like it, so chose your way Mate.

[NixPille]

It's comforting to see the usual army of socially indignant and big company bashing THAIVISA members putting matters straight. I'm sure their lofty motives to rush to defend this small business owner with four children (sic!) will be noticed in the right circles and assure a shared Nobel Peace price.

Or maybe said members will get a free subscription to The Sun (notice to non-brits: this UK daily newspaper excels (like a very productive core of THAIVISA members) in setting the world straight by being socially indignant and bashing big companies and politicians no end).

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[butterlimbo]

The only ones, that should be arrested here, are the bosses of Starbucks for overcharging the brown liquid, they call coffee!!

Overcharging is when you agree to a price beforehand and then charge a higher price later.

What Starbucks does is called selling coffee.

coffee? they sell syrup.

[farang2002]

Starbucks need to get over themselves and extract their head from their collective corporate arse.

The only humorous thing Starbucks is hearing Americans rave on about how good the coffee is. Most of the world wouldn't even degrease their car engines with the stuff.

Most of the world has made Starbucks the largest coffee company in the world. Where have you been??

[Doc46]

So much for the little man trying to make a couple BHT, give someone a fair go,,,,Starbucks scared of a bit of competition, bunch of pussies,,,anyone who can read knows the difference. They must be blind Ha ha

[mrtoad]

If many of the posters were victims of this blatant piece of IP infringement they wouldn't be happy, about time that IP infringement, copy right etc was enforced properly in this country.

[Edfinke]

To RE-Member...

Thats a real correct POV. It has nothing to do with good coffee , or bad coffee.

Why they take this brand ??? Easy , they want use the advantage of the STARBUCK brand.

They know what they have done. Better they make a good coffee and sale under their own

-registered- brand. Than they will see. Maybe they are happy if many other use their good name.

Sure , I am not happy to, if somebody use my " good " name for their basic advantage.

Better they use their brain before.

[capt_canada42]

Starbucks have a short memory they stole there whole idea from Alfred Peet in Berkeley California Mr Peets Coffee shop Walnut and Vine even copied the insides of his store ... turn about is fair play ....

Edited October 18, 2013 by capt_canada42

[lovetotravel]

The only ones, that should be arrested here, are the bosses of Starbucks for overcharging the brown liquid, they call coffee!!

Right on ! The two worst cups of coffe I ever bought were from a starbucks in Bangkok and another one in Chengdu. Both highly priced and notable by their absence of that one vital ingredient ... COFFEE ! Just cups of hot water with an extremely faint brown tinge. They got me twice, shame on me ! Never again.

You obviously have not bought many cups of coffee. There were many times when I would have gladly paid for a cup of Starbucks.

I sense a lot of jealous people here. Congrats to these 3 gentlemen for creating an extremely successful company. One ANY of us would be very happy to own.

It's called consumerism. If you don't like it, don't shop there. Be glad we have choices. Many people around the world don't.

Personally, I find it too expensive, so I don't shop there. Again, we are lucky to have choices.

[CelticBhoy]

Starbucks being overly petty here.

They'll lose a few Muslim customers

if they carry this to the end I'm sure.

What a load of cods wallop....

you spend years building up your business and expand globally and then your saying its OK for blatant rip offs of your brand , Starbucks have every right and from the look of the logo's every basis to be concerned here... one thing about brand equity that needs to be understood is that if you knowingly allow a rip off brand such as here to trade then if someone bigger uses your brand as well then you have lost all ground to defend your trademark.

I fully support Starbucks here.. dont particularly like their coffee but fully support what they are doing.... find it ironic too that the issue of religion was weaved into the guys excuse.

To the issue of them losing a few Muslim customers... ohhh please.. globally / regionally do you think Starbucks will care if a few Muslims get upset and don't drink their coffee albeit I doubt the ones who would get upset here don't have enough money to step inside a Starbucks.

Ask yourself where the buck stops on this one... is it all right if a guy copies the logo and pushes a cart ?? What if its a shop out back of Nonthaburi ?? What if its a few shops around the capital.. what about 10-15 shops all around hiso shopping areas... when is it that it doesn't become petty anymore.. the answer is when you are dealing with your brand and the intrinsic brand equity that its never.. any minor infringement of the brand should be acted on...

Starbucks arent being petty, they are simply protecting their considerable investment against blatant infringement.. fact that he has a cart and is small fry is irrelevant.

It's Thailand pal, famous for it's copying.

Have you never bought a snide shirt, watch, etc?

This bloke is selling coffee with a similar name, not a duplicated one.

Blatant infringement my bum!

[Equalizer]

I believe there is a shop in Hua Hin ripping starbucks off on a larger scale than this.

[mrtoad]

Starbucks have a short memory they stole there whole idea from Alfred Peet in Berkeley California Mr Peets Coffee shop Walnut and Vine even copied the insides of his store ... turn about is fair play ....

There is a whole difference to Peers, and they don't blatantly use the logo etc. Peets is actually very good, but any fool can differentiate.

[cameltrakker]

I prefer Thai ooliang coffee cold from a street vendor 15 or 20 baht. Better than the kwai urine at Starbucks for 10 times that amount

[lomatopo]

It should seem obvious, even to the dimmest of bulbs here, that Messrs. Maslae chose to copy the Starbucks logo and name in an effort to improve their opportunities. In most places this is illegal. If their coffee is so wonderful why not use their own name and a unique logo? (Im not a huge fan of the Thai brown bag coffee. Often the water used is foul smelling, and they use the grounds over, and over, and over.)

Cant blame Central Group for protecting their Starbucks franchise here, and the thousands of jobs it has created.

Arguably Starbucks helped drive the global coffee renaissance, which in turn has led to many, many small, independent growers, roasters and coffee shop owners. Obviously, the north of Thailand has benefited from the coffee growing business.

Starbucks have a short memory they stole there whole idea from Alfred Peet in Berkeley California Mr Peets Coffee shop Walnut and Vine even copied the insides of his store ... turn about is fair play ....

The Starbucks founders routinely and often credit Alfred Peet with the inspiration for them to start Starbucks. Example:

"What made Peet's so strong was that Alfred Peet had so much knowledge about coffee and tea," Jerry Baldwin, one of the founders of Starbucks who is on Peet's board of directors, said Friday. Baldwin said Mr. Peet was an inspiration for Starbucks.

Edited October 18, 2013 by lomatopo

[capt_canada42]

Starbucks have a short memory they stole there whole idea from Alfred Peet in Berkeley California Mr Peets Coffee shop Walnut and Vine even copied the insides of his store ... turn about is fair play ....

There is a whole difference to Peers, and they don't blatantly use the logo etc. Peets is actually very good, but any fool can differentiate.

Toad is that you its me here in Phuket

[hellodolly]

Its clearly a Copy Right infringement - It's obvious that the Coffee cart owners set out from the offset to use the Starbucks brand to their own advantage. Yes, its a bit of a David & Goliath situation, however, that doesn't detract from the fact that this is Copying and against IP laws.

Its unfortunate for the owners that they have been the ones chose by Starbucks when there are so many others. This issue has very little to do with money, it has everything to do with protecting their brand. Starbucks are drawing a line in the sand.

They are telling other business owners: It's Damrong to Copy someone else's brand. Get off your Damras'ses and create your own brand...

I have no trouble seeing the difference between the signs and the names and I do not have that great eyesight.

I used them back in the States and Canada because they had a chai lattae I liked with an extra pump of almond.

When I went into them here I noticed they did not have it and all their prices were comparable to the ones back home and I never even thought for a second that they were paying the same wages or rent. Just gouging. I don't go in them any more. They67 have nothing to offer. There business ethics were mentioned earlier. I agree they do not have any.

The only ones, that should be arrested here, are the bosses of Starbucks for overcharging the brown liquid, they call coffee!! width=32 alt=coffee1.gif>

Overcharging is when you agree to a price beforehand and then charge a higher price later.

What Starbucks does is called selling coffee.

over charging is when you sell some thing for more than it is worth.

[capt_canada42]

If many of the posters were victims of this blatant piece of IP infringement they wouldn't be happy, about time that IP infringement, copy right etc was enforced properly in this country.

Oh well its a guy stealing your name Toad I guess i will have to take him out .. for Copy Right infringement

[Beetlejuice]

Starbucks or should be described as the Bigbucks, warning, do not dare tread on our turf or else.

If this was just a small nondescript business, than the authorities would not give a rat`s behind about it`s copyright issues and someone trying to cash in on their name.

It`s just a case of the big boys flexing off their muscles and I have no doubts that the small fry who are now finding themselves on the receiving end of the big bucks coffee cafe company will not stand any chance of escaping the wrath of the mighty multi International American Corporation.

Edited October 18, 2013 by Beetlejuice

[Louisblackbird]

I've tasted the coffee off the cart

It's affordable

No where like the high price

That's charged by The large chain rip off

And a third of the cost !

They should not waste more time and money let the poor man earn a living

All of the coffee is a copy of the original

The original is after all the first one ?

[robblok]

Its clearly a Copy Right infringement - It's obvious that the Coffee cart owners set out from the offset to use the Starbucks brand to their own advantage. Yes, its a bit of a David & Goliath situation, however, that doesn't detract from the fact that this is Copying and against IP laws.

Its unfortunate for the owners that they have been the ones chose by Starbucks when there are so many others. This issue has very little to do with money, it has everything to do with protecting their brand. Starbucks are drawing a line in the sand.

They are telling other business owners: It's Damrong to Copy someone else's brand. Get off your Damras'ses and create your own brand...

Totally agree, they use the wrong logo. I am sure they have been asked to stop and did not. If this was the first step no warning then it is over the top. But I agree that IP should be respected.

All those people moaning about Starbucks coffee does not change the case (I don't drink coffee and am only seen there when I join others to be social)

[capt_canada42]

It should seem obvious, even to the dimmest of bulbs here, that Messrs. Maslae chose to copy the Starbucks logo and name in an effort to improve their opportunities. In most places this is illegal. If their coffee is so wonderful why not use their own name and a unique logo? (Im not a huge fan of the Thai brown bag coffee. Often the water used is foul smelling, and they use the grounds over, and over, and over.)

Cant blame Central Group for protecting their Starbucks franchise here, and the thousands of jobs it has created.

Arguably Starbucks helped drive the global coffee renaissance, which in turn has led to many, many small, independent growers, roasters and coffee shop owners. Obviously, the north of Thailand has benefited from the coffee growing business.

Starbucks have a short memory they stole there whole idea from Alfred Peet in Berkeley California Mr Peets Coffee shop Walnut and Vine even copied the insides of his store ... turn about is fair play ....

The Starbucks founders routinely and often credit Alfred Peet with the inspiration for them to start Starbucks. Example:

"What made Peet's so strong was that Alfred Peet had so much knowledge about coffee and tea," Jerry Baldwin, one of the founders of Starbucks who is on Peet's board of directors, said Friday. Baldwin said Mr. Peet was an inspiration for Starbucks.

Well hell they drank coffee there every day for years they had better give old Alfred Peet credit he was Dutch from Indonesia and his family had been in the business 100's of years when they kicked the Dutch out he came to Berkeley .. I asked him here to Phuket years ago as he was a friend but he had enough of Asia .. any ways stealing da Toads name is definitely worse than this coffee deal ...

[tominbkk]

The only ones, that should be arrested here, are the bosses of Starbucks for overcharging the brown liquid, they call coffee!!

I'm grateful for Starbucks. Before they arrived in Thailand it was very hard to find a good cuppa. Now there are great coffee huts with fine espresso all over the place, for a third the price. Thanks Starbucks!

[tominbkk]

Not a very clever things to do , specially if you have to face this giant American firm.

Just imagine if you opened a restaurant name S&B, looking just like the S&P. You'd be shut down immediately, or have your restaurant torched or maybe your legs broken.