Starbucks Battles Over Trademark with Small Alaskan Company
Starbucks has contested a trademark application by a small Alaskan apparel company, claiming that Starbucks’ use of a siren in its branding extends to the word “siren” itself.
In late 2018, Mountains and Mermaids, an online retailer based in Wasilla, Alaska, applied to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for a trademark over the phrase “Siren’s Brew.” The company recently began displaying the image of a siren holding a cup of coffee. Starbucks has sought to block this application on the basis that it is too closely connected to its own branding, including the familiar design of the two-tailed mermaid in its logo.
Although Starbucks does not own a registration for the word "siren", it claims that it has established common law trademark rights to the term. In its opposition filing, the company stated that, "as a result of the Starbucks Siren having served as the public face of Starbucks for nearly fifty (50) years, as well as Starbucks and Starbucks’ employees use of the term Siren in reference to itself and its products and services . . . the public has come to associate not just the various images of the Starbucks Siren . . . with Starbucks, but also the term 'Siren' itself."
This case is a continuation of Starbucks’ recent attempts to register "Siren's Blend" as a trademark for coffee. Last February, Starbucks applied to trademark the name “Siren’s Blend,” which was rejected by the trademark office on the basis that Mountains and Mermaids had already applied for a "Siren's Brew."
Although Starbucks has offered to help Mountains & Mermaids phase out their Siren’s Brew products, and is willing to foot the bill for a new trademark application for the company to use “Mermaid’s Brew” instead, the retailer has stated that it will continue to protect its design and will not change its trademark.
Author: Clara Ryu, 2019/2020 Articling Student-at-law
Photo Credit: https://unsplash.com/@asthetik
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Kansas City Chiefs Stars Sued for Trademark Infringement Over Steakhouse
The sneaker company, 1587 Sneakers, is reportedly suing Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, along with their restaurant partners, for trademark infringement.1587 Sneakers… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence…