Bell Vs Starbucks Case Study
Case: Bell v. Starbucks U.S. Brands Corp., 389 F.Supp.2d 766 (2005), United States District Court
Facts: Rex Bell, the owner of a small, privately owned music venue, filed a complaint against Starbuck’s U.S. Brands Corp in response to receiving “cease and desist” letters after he applied for registration, with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, of the “Starbock Beer” trademark.
Bell was seeking a declaratory judgement that the use of the “Star Bock Beer” logo and name, in connection with alcoholic beverages, was not in violation of the Defendant’s rights under the “Federal Law of Trademark Infringement”, the “Federal Law of Unfair Competition”, the “Common Law of Unfair Competition”, the “Federal Trademark Dilution Act” or the “Texas Anti-Dilution Statute”. Defendants contested and filed counterclaims alleging violations of the aforementioned laws.
Starbuck’s claimed that Bell’s use of a distinctive and original logo could cause confusion between the two …show more content…
The Plaintiff’s use of the “Star Bock Beer” logo in itself does not infringe on the Defendant’s mark even though the use of “Starbock” or “Star Bock” can be confusing and does constitute unfair competition under the Lanham Act. The court’s finding only applied to the limited use of the logo on the minimal amount of merchandise and at the small venue. The Supreme Court requires evidence that the logo dilutes their mark and as the Defendant’s did not produce any evidence of this, the use of the “Star Bock Beer” logo does not dilute their mark.
The Court granted the Defendant’s request for permanent injunction against use of the mark “Starbock” or “Star Bock”, but not his use of “Star Bock Beer” as used in his logo presented. The Court denied the Starbucks’ request to cancel Bell’s
Facts: Rex Bell, the owner of a small, privately owned music venue, filed a complaint against Starbuck’s U.S. Brands Corp in response to receiving “cease and desist” letters after he applied for registration, with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, of the “Starbock Beer” trademark.
Bell was seeking a declaratory judgement that the use of the “Star Bock Beer” logo and name, in connection with alcoholic beverages, was not in violation of the Defendant’s rights under the “Federal Law of Trademark Infringement”, the “Federal Law of Unfair Competition”, the “Common Law of Unfair Competition”, the “Federal Trademark Dilution Act” or the “Texas Anti-Dilution Statute”. Defendants contested and filed counterclaims alleging violations of the aforementioned laws.
Starbuck’s claimed that Bell’s use of a distinctive and original logo could cause confusion between the two …show more content…
The Plaintiff’s use of the “Star Bock Beer” logo in itself does not infringe on the Defendant’s mark even though the use of “Starbock” or “Star Bock” can be confusing and does constitute unfair competition under the Lanham Act. The court’s finding only applied to the limited use of the logo on the minimal amount of merchandise and at the small venue. The Supreme Court requires evidence that the logo dilutes their mark and as the Defendant’s did not produce any evidence of this, the use of the “Star Bock Beer” logo does not dilute their mark.
The Court granted the Defendant’s request for permanent injunction against use of the mark “Starbock” or “Star Bock”, but not his use of “Star Bock Beer” as used in his logo presented. The Court denied the Starbucks’ request to cancel Bell’s