

'Dumb Starbucks' coffee shop opens in Los Feliz - rcsorensen
http://www.scpr.org/news/2014/02/08/42085/dumb-starbucks-coffee-shop-opens-in-los-feliz/

======
eschaton
Who else hates the ignorance inherent in phrases like "the fair use law." They
got it right in the very next sentence of their FAQ ("doctrine of fair use").
And then they made the same mistake again later with "the parody law" instead
of "the concept of parody" or something similar.

If you're going to attempt to make an argument about the law, you'd best at
least try not to sound like an idiot. It's like the people in software who
confuse copyright, trademark, and patent: Your business is IP, have at least
the most cursory understanding of the concepts damn it!

~~~
rspeer
This company is obviously _trying_ to lose a lawsuit. Someone is trying to
move the goalposts of "fair use". That Web page is not written by someone who
believes what they're saying, and the ignorance is probably part of the plan.

Dumb Starbucks will get sued, and they'll hire a dumb lawyer, who will take
the very dumb approach of fighting the case to the end, and then the company
will get forcefully shut down for trademark violations.

And the smart company that's bankrolling this, whoever they are, will point to
the precedent of Starbucks v. Dumb Starbucks the next time they want to
silence some _actual_ fair use.

~~~
seizethecheese
Woah, that is some epic speculation, and it actually seems plausible.

------
7577463636
...so, Starbucks paid some guerrilla marketing company millions of dollars to
stage an absurd publicity stunt.

Supporting Facts:

    
    
      1. All publicity is good publicity.
      2. All branding is identical, verbatim, (e.g. no 
         use of small, medium, large; instead branded sizing 
         parlance is used) forcing the customer to closely 
         inspect the imitation for flaws. This forces a level of 
         psychological engagement in the customer that would not 
         occur in regular, legitimate establishments.
      3. Starbucks, for all it's popularity, rarely experiences
         negative press. Thus, their brand can easily tolerate 
         examples of light trolling.
      4. Dubious "news" coverage offers vectors for market 
         penetration into sectors that represent the Lowest
         Common Denominator, without cheapening Starbucks' 
         brand. In other words, they can speak to an audience
         that they'd rather not be associated with, without 
         having to directly engage them. They can inject their 
         brand's presence into the daily lives of people who 
         would not ordinarily pay attention to their usual modes 
         of advertising.
      5. Without an entity to claim credit for this activity, 
         this parody only serves to provide increased exposure 
         to Starbucks. A well executed parody without an author
         will provide no alternate context to the premise of the
         joke. If there is any meaning or theme to the parody, 
         the audience can barely guess at what it should be, if
         the intent of the performer cannot be discerned.
    
      6. Hypothesis: The "Dumb" shop will only stay open for as 
         long as the minor local news publicity lasts. It's 
         there only to make people use the word "Starbucks" as 
         frequently as possible, in as many sound bites as       
         possible, trigger some water cooler conversation for 
         about a week (word of mouth buzz), and then die.

------
waterlesscloud
Given the location of this particular business, in the middle a neighborhood
densely populated by hip and wealthy show-business professionals, it's quite
possible that the whoever is running it knows _exactly_ what they're doing
legally.

Odds are quite heavy it's some sort of art project / prank.

