Starbucks Corp. v. Black Bear Micro Roastery Trademark bullying has become a common tactic amongst big corporations. Large corporations, like Starbucks, know very well that many small competitors cannot afford the costs linked to prevailing in court at the end of trademark related lawsuits. Corporations tend to use these tactics to try and thin out the competition to maximize their profits. In the case of Starbucks Corp. v. Black Bear Micro Roastery, Starbucks uses this exact method to try and get rid of one of their competitor’s new product, Charbucks coffee. Black Bear Micro Roastery, launched in 1995, was a small family owned business that tried to provide gourmet coffee beans with a bit of a twist. Soon after their business began to grow the Clark family began to develop new types of roasted blends with catchy names, “Charbucks” being one of their more popular one. Soon after Charbucks hit the market Black Bear received a call from one of Starbucks’s lawyers, which threatened to end the loved family business. In my opinion, Black Bear was not doing anything illegal. The small company was very careful not to break any trademark laws, and made it a priority to link the name “Charbucks” with their company’s name to avoid any confusion. On the design of the packet they added a picture of a black bear on top of their name Black Bear Micro Roastery, as well as their slogan for the new blend, to try and avoid any connections with the Starbucks Brand. They made sure to follow procedures and regulations. Their main objective was to release a product that would best satisfy their customers’ need for a darker blend, in essence “they wanted it dark…they got it dark.” Yet Starbucks believed that Charbucks was simply a knock off inspired by one of their blends. If we apply Kantian ethics to the decision of Starbucks to try and use legal maneuvering to win the case without giving Black Bear a fair chance to defend themselves in Court. It becomes clear that Starbucks is being unethical in the way that they approach this lawsuit. If large corporation were to use their resources to maneuver their way around the law; then competition in the market would be drawn to a strop. Even when looked at from a Utilitarianism approach; if Starbucks were to succeed then small companies, like Black Bear, would not be able to survive and
