Hacker News Reader

Comment by blazespin | Hacker News Reader

Normally I'm not a particularly big fan of trademarks (eg, Facebook was a term Zuck took that was already established to describe college year books, he shouldn't have been allowed to get that. It's also somewhat descriptive, which is another no-no on trademarks). Frappuccino is a pretty unique (and meaningless) word that Starbucks spent considerable monetary resources to acquire from George Howell [1] and further used its marketing budget to ensure it had meaning in the consumer mind.

I think if they don't want the word associated with Alcoholic beverages I am pretty sure they are right to ask this guy to cease and desist. Also, if they don't, and for whatever reason this guys beer becomes popular and loss of distinctiveness occurs, they may lose their trademark via abandonment.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Howell_(entrepreneur)#St...

View on HN

I don't see how frappuccinno is any less descriptive than facebook, it's a portmanteau of frappè + cappuccino. It never crossed my mind it was a Starbucks' trademark until now, I've seen it used everywhere.

Everywhere? You mean on every corner in a local starbucks near you as described in the article?

And anywhere else that sells prebottled drinks labeled "Frappuccino." Until now, I didn't realize those bottles sitting in the local grocer probably have a Starbucks logo on them someplace.

IIRC it was a joint venture with Pepsi (and yes, those bottles are clearly labeled Starbucks)

I have seen "frappuccinno" drinks offered for sale at more than a few local non-starbucks coffee shops over the years.

And they aren't licensing anything from Starbucks?

For a while I was looking into opening a coffee shop and it's fairly straightforward to license names and sell coffee and coffee products from a lot of major coffee companies. Not that I care for Starbucks coffee, but it was the biggest brand that business brokers pushed on me.

No way for me to know, but I doubt it. I'm talking about very small shops very out of the way, and quite a long time ago as well. I assume it was under the radar.

That being said, frappuccino is hoveringly close to being generic and therefor not a trademark anymore. I've certainly seen other stores offering a product of the same name, or at last customers asking for a drink of the same. They do certainly need to be seen to be actively defending if they don't want to lose it.

Well' sure. It has become somewhat generic, but as long as they protect it, it remains their mark. That said, Starbucks doesn't brew beer, so the likelihood of confusion is low. I doubt they would prevail in court.

Starbucks might not brew beer, but there are plenty of brewers who use coffee in their beers, so the likelihood of confusion isn't that small.

Now that I noticed, Frapuccino is the only menu entry with a (R) mark beside it http://www.starbucks.com/menu/drinks

I have to check next time I'm in a store

I think if they don't want the word associated with Alcoholic beverages I am pretty sure they are right to ask this guy to cease and desist.

The guy also stated in the article that they were completely correct to issue a cease and desist, even if he sarcastic in his response.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com