Comments on: Whole Latte Trademark Trouble http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/11/whole_latte_tra.html The Law, the Universe, and Everything Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:18:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Flavoured Coffee http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/11/whole_latte_tra.html/comment-page-1#comment-74486 Flavoured Coffee Fri, 18 Feb 2011 14:43:06 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/11/whole-latte-trademark-trouble.html#comment-74486 HARAR would work as either a GI or a certification mark since the distinctive beans are associated with the Harar region. But as a trademark it has trouble because it may be understood less as a brand than as a type of bean. Whether a trademark or a certification mark, Starbucks would still have to license the use the word. HARAR would work as either a GI or a certification mark since the distinctive beans are associated with the Harar region. But as a trademark it has trouble because it may be understood less as a brand than as a type of bean. Whether a trademark or a certification mark, Starbucks would still have to license the use the word.

]]> By: Flavoured Coffee http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/11/whole_latte_tra.html/comment-page-1#comment-74485 Flavoured Coffee Fri, 18 Feb 2011 14:42:27 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/11/whole-latte-trademark-trouble.html#comment-74485 HARAR would work as either a GI or a certification mark since the distinctive beans are associated with the Harar region. But as a trademark it has trouble because it may be understood less as a brand than as a type of bean. Whether a trademark or a certification mark, Starbucks would still have to license the use the word Thanks for the post! HARAR would work as either a GI or a certification mark since the distinctive beans are associated with the Harar region. But as a trademark it has trouble because it may be understood less as a brand than as a type of bean. Whether a trademark or a certification mark, Starbucks would still have to license the use the word

Thanks for the post!

]]> By: Christine Farley http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/11/whole_latte_tra.html/comment-page-1#comment-56556 Christine Farley Fri, 03 Nov 2006 22:42:29 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/11/whole-latte-trademark-trouble.html#comment-56556 As promised, I did speak with someone at Light Years IP about the strategy. The choice of trademark over certification mark was a deliberate one. Ethiopia wants to set up a network of licensed distributors and thinks trademarks will enable this in a way that certification marks won't. Apparently, they were put off certification marks by the difficulties India has had enforcing its Darjeeling certification mark. I can't see why a trademark is any more exclusive than a certification mark. See the Roquefort cheese case. As promised, I did speak with someone at Light Years IP about the strategy. The choice of trademark over certification mark was a deliberate one. Ethiopia wants to set up a network of licensed distributors and thinks trademarks will enable this in a way that certification marks won’t. Apparently, they were put off certification marks by the difficulties India has had enforcing its Darjeeling certification mark. I can’t see why a trademark is any more exclusive than a certification mark. See the Roquefort cheese case.

]]> By: Christine Farley http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/11/whole_latte_tra.html/comment-page-1#comment-56555 Christine Farley Fri, 03 Nov 2006 06:21:19 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/11/whole-latte-trademark-trouble.html#comment-56555 Arnold & Porter must have been annoyed by the coverage by The Guradian who reported that "the Ethiopian government last year filed COPYRIGHT applications to trademark its most famous coffee names." (emphasis added) Malpractice? Arnold & Porter must have been annoyed by the coverage by The Guradian who reported that “the Ethiopian government last year filed COPYRIGHT applications to trademark its most famous coffee names.” (emphasis added) Malpractice?

]]> By: Pamela http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/11/whole_latte_tra.html/comment-page-1#comment-56554 Pamela Fri, 03 Nov 2006 03:28:28 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/11/whole-latte-trademark-trouble.html#comment-56554 starbucks will come around now that you have made them aware. I saw them on 60 minutes and they seem reasonable starbucks will come around now that you have made them aware. I saw them on 60 minutes and they seem reasonable

]]> By: Frank http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/11/whole_latte_tra.html/comment-page-1#comment-56553 Frank Fri, 03 Nov 2006 01:41:30 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/11/whole-latte-trademark-trouble.html#comment-56553 Fascinating issue. I think there was an interesting colloquy between Madhavi Sunder and Mark Lemley on how much enchanced IP rights can help LDC's at a conference recently. In any event, I'm happy to see my old firm (Arnold & Porter) is helping Light Years IP in its mission--this sounds like a terrific idea for public interest IP work. Fascinating issue. I think there was an interesting colloquy between Madhavi Sunder and Mark Lemley on how much enchanced IP rights can help LDC’s at a conference recently. In any event, I’m happy to see my old firm (Arnold & Porter) is helping Light Years IP in its mission–this sounds like a terrific idea for public interest IP work.

]]> By: Susan http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/11/whole_latte_tra.html/comment-page-1#comment-56552 Susan Fri, 03 Nov 2006 01:25:07 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/11/whole-latte-trademark-trouble.html#comment-56552 Thank you for this interesting and insightful analysis. I hope you start looking a bit better soon! Thank you for this interesting and insightful analysis. I hope you start looking a bit better soon!

]]>