

Nathan Fielder is behind Dumb Starbucks, gets shut down by Health Dept - staunch
http://www.latimes.com/food/dailydish/la-dd-nathan-fielder-dumb-starbucks,0,2524213.story

======
emhart
evan_ called it:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7208379](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7208379)

------
lisper
The biggest problem with dumb-starbucks-as-parody is that it isn't very funny.

~~~
adamnemecek
I mean it was not necessarily supposed to be funny in and of itself but in the
context of the TV show.

------
RRRA
I'm surprised most people were not wondering why the McDonald of coffee was
this popular anyway...

Maybe this'll make them go to their local coffee shop instead, dumb or not!
;-)

------
cpqq
Great publicity for his show. From the first season, he helps businesses who
are failing or struggling to get a ton of business / foot-traffic. Probably a
variation for Season 2, which is coming out soon. Looks like it's worked.

~~~
GhotiFish
Maybe not so great, I still have no idea what show this is about. I don't
think I'll ever care, either.

edit: Wait, skimmed the article again.

Nathan for you?

pbtbtbtbtbt

------
cnlwsu
Starbucks should be paying CC for this kind of publicity...

~~~
mbreese
The real question is how will SBUX react to this... if they start rattling
legal sabers, it could be bad. However, if they go along with the joke, then
it could be great publicity. I hope they go along with the joke.

~~~
despideme
Given that this is Comedy Central (owned by Viacom), I'd imagine the idea was
run past Starbucks' legal department before it was greenlit. I'd also wager
there's a legal agreement governing what CC can and can't do, and even how
Starbucks will or won't react.

~~~
mbreese
Oh, I doubt it. This is probably produced by an independent production team
for CC. I don't know if CC legal would be notified before the fact of this or
just prior to broadcast.

In the OP, they had quoted Starbucks (PR?) saying that they thought "Dumb
Starbucks" was misusing their trademarks.

~~~
jamesbrownuhh
Viacom is all about the money - I'd say there was a non-zero chance that they
actually made Starbucks pay to be the subject of the sketch, and Starbucks PR
are just playing along.

------
CamperBob2
Can somebody explain the joke behind the "Dumb"?

~~~
gkoberger
By using the word "Dumb", it (in theory) becomes a parody. You couldn't call
your store "Starbucks", however "Dumb Starbucks" (again, in theory) is a
parody and therefore not a copyright violation.

~~~
CamperBob2
Sure, but why that particular adjective? "Dumb" doesn't carry any cultural
resonance or verbal alliteration when paired with "Starbucks."

If he'd called it "Fourbucks", for instance, that might've been funnier.

~~~
evan_
The joke isn't that he's making fun of Starbucks. The joke is that Nathan
Fielder (or more accurately, the character he's playing) is so naïve that he
thinks that the "Dumb Starbucks" plan will actually work. His character is
supposed to be the dryest, least-witty person on the planet. He takes
everything seriously, and when he does say something funny, it's funnier
because he seemingly doesn't realize it.

If it was funny, it would ruin the joke.

------
pstack
Never heard of him, but what a dumb stunt. Ooh, so artistic. Edgy. Anti-
establishment. Ooh.

~~~
ng12
It's supposed to be kind of stupid. The guy used to write sketches for Demetri
Martin's show to give you a sense of his comedy style. If you don't think it's
funny, that's fine, but it's not supposed to be "anti-establishment" or
anything of the like.

