Starbucks v. Starbuds: trademark battle?

Starbucks recently filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Brandpat, LLC dba Starbuds Flowers (Starbuds), alleging infringement of its iconic trademark (see below). 

Starbuds uses the following mark as alleged in the complaint filed on June 28, 2024.

As even the casual observer can see, the Starbuds logo is strikingly similar. Both marks include an image of a siren (twin-tailed mermaid) within a circle surrounded by a double-ringed green circle. The Starbuds logo shows “STARBUDS” in the upper portion of the green circle and “FLOWERS” in the lower portion of the green circle. 

The Starbuds logo lacks the stars shown in the Starbucks logo; however, the Starbuds logo uses a marijuana leaf on each side of the mermaid image in the green circle. Further, the Starbuds mermaid appears to be smoking; a blunt is shown in her right hand, and smoke emanates from her mouth with a cloud of smoke above her head. 

Starbucks alleges a litany of IP claims against Starbuds, including copyright and trademark infringement claims based upon the copyrights and registered trademarks that Starbucks owns. Based upon the complaint, Starbucks owns two copyrights for the siren image; at least 13 trademark registrations in 14 classes for the siren image logo; and 21 trademark registrations for the word STARBUCKS or STARBUCKS COFFEE in about 14 classes. 

It is clear we have Goliath against David, and we know who usually wins.  Does Starbuds have any apparent defenses? Fair use and parody are two common defenses, but neither seem to apply in this case. Starbuds is allegedly using the mark for its cannabis products, which are – interestingly – sold off a truck (see below). 

Fair use relates to good faith use of a mark for descriptive purposes or its primary meaning. Such a defense could possibly be successful, but Stardbuds goes well beyond a descriptive use due to the use of a logo that appears to have all the prominent features of the Starbucks logo. A Washington company has registered the word mark STARBUDS (Reg. 4766937, under Class 25), so, according to this, the mere use of the word “Starbuds” does not offend Starbucks. 

Other common defenses, including laches, estoppel, unclean hands, or contesting the STARBUCKS marks, seem like long shots or non-existent. Starbucks is clearly asserting and defending its registered marks. Further, Starbucks has multiple registrations of the siren and word mark.

The only distinction seen is the goods that are being sold by Starbuds.  Starbuds engages in various cannabis products, which limits the ability to register the mark. Starbucks has products related to coffee products, clothing, cafes, and franchises. Starbucks, however, alleged dilution claims in addition to the infringement claims. It is well documented that Starbucks is a famous mark.

If Starbuds is found to infringe the Starbucks marks, then Starbucks will be entitled to injunctive relief, monetary damages, disgorgement of profits, and attorney fees. It would be extremely risky for Starbuds to attempt to defend this case. It is also surprising that they would attempt to proceed with the Starbud logo in its present form, but maybe it was the lack of adequate counseling by a trademark attorney. Nonetheless, let’s see how this case progresses this year. 

← Back to News