The forthcoming issue of the IndUS Business Journal looks into Starbucks’ complaint that an Indian entrepreneur’s plan to open 25 cafes under the STARSTRUCK name and mark infringes the STARBUCKS name and mark. The article, “Starbucks in trademark battle with Indian company,” quotes the entrepreneur, Shahnaz Husain, as saying she decided to open her own coffee shop while visiting a Starbucks store in London. The article says “Starstruck” cafes will feature a “glamour theme, complete with posters of Hollywood movie stars.” Ms. Husain states she chose the name “because she wanted to distinguish it” from Starbucks.
Despite that sentiment, Starbucks objects. Its spokesperson, T. May Kulthol, states that Starbucks has long owned the rights to its name and logo in India. She said Starbucks will press the issue in court if Ms. Husain’s company refuses to adopt another name.
The article quotes STL’s publisher on the process a court would likely go through to decide the issue. Since it seems odd to quote an article quoting me, I’ll just say I stated my belief that a court would consider the likelihood of confusion between the two marks, focusing on similarities in the apperance, sound, and meaning of the marks, as well as the competing goods or services. If the court determined the later mark created a likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark, it would find in favor of the earlier user.
So do I think STARSTRUCK infringes STARBUCKS, when both marks are used for cafes? You bet. Out of the infinite number of possible combinations of letters, numbers, and symbols Ms. Husain could have selected for her new chain of cafes, she just happened to pick one so close to the most famous brand in the coffee business? Doesn’t seem likely.