Poor Farmer

Time line 2004: Starbucks filed application to register “Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo” trademark. Ethiopia asked Starbucks to drop its application because the country is preparing to register the names Yirgacheffe, Sidamo and Harar; Starbucks refused to talk 2005: NCA filed a letter of protest asking Ethiopia's application to register all the names be denied. Starbucks then drop its application for “Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo” but continued to ignore Ethiopia's call to discuss. Ethiopia's application for Yirgacheffe trademark has been granted; the contestants expressed their regrets for lack of preparations to block it. Ethiopia continued to seek Starbucks' voluntary agreement acknowledging the country's ownership of the names Sidamo and Harar 2006 October: Oxfam and 85,000 Starbucks customers asked Starbucks to come to the table to discuss and sign a Licensing Agreement with Ethiopia acknowledging Ethiopia's ownership of the names Sidamo and Harar 2006 November: Ox...

The Times of London interviewed Jim Donald, Starbucks CEO, who said that he “told Mr Zenawi the company prefers “certification” over trademarking.” "“So what’s the difference? Mr Donald shifts slightly in his Starbucks-regulation armchair. “I can’t talk about the details because I don’t understand them,” he says. “I’m not a trademark lawyer.” It’s quite an admission for the chief executive of one of the world’s most successful trademarked brands, especially since it’s a distinction that customers seem to care about,” said the Times. Read the full article “ Starbucks seeks the right blend of global ambition and ethical trade ” here . In a separate report, “ Ethiopia argues trademark would give coffee growers an extra shot ”, the Times quoted the director-general of the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office, Getachew Mengiste as saying, “It ( certification ) is costly and, in countries such as Ethiopia, it may not be feasible where coffee grows in the back yards of millions of far...

This entire trademark wrangling finds its roots to those early days in 2004 when Ethiopia was preparing to file an application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to register the names Harar, Sidamo and Yirgacheffe. Though Starbucks won't discuss the issue in public, I found out that at least three reasons are driving the company’s decisions which might bear risks to its own brand . In 2004, just before filing their applications to register the coffee brands, Ethiopian government officials discovered that Starbucks had already submitted an application to trademark “Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo.” The government attempted to engage Starbucks in discussions because it had become evident that the company’s application might jeopardize Ethiopia’s plans to trademark the name, Sidamo. The company later dropped its application to register “Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo” but only after, the National Coffee Association (NCA), whom Starbucks is the influential member , had fil...

Ethiopia’s coffee trademarking initiative and Starbucks’ refusal to acknowledge the country’s ownership of the names Sidamo and Harar stirred up both scholarly and jingoistic dialogue. So far, the taboo surrounding intellectual property as a matter of rights has been unveiled. This has left some corporations, such as Starbucks, shocked while the public, whose trust in Capitalism obstructed their views through Corporate Social Responsibility, is angered. The government in Ethiopia and Starbucks proved to be making a bad blend. Starbucks’ damage control measures have electrified the majority of consumers to campaign against unethical business practices. Critics of the government in Ethiopia, on the other hand, suspect that the project is the government’s plan to control the coffee industry. The confusion left some people disillusioned and cynical. Situations in Ethiopia substantiate the claim by those who are convinced that the government’s dictatorship, abusive practices, and widespread...

Gemeda Humnasa of American Chronicle warns that Starbucks’ refusal to accept Ethiopia’s ownership of its own coffee names will have consequences. “There are many factors contributing to Ethiopia’s inability to remove poverty including costly wars, dry weather, unfair international trade barriers and subsidized corresponding sectors in other well-off nations” Gemeda said. I add absence of democracy and human rights abuses to the list. Gemeda continues, “But Starbucks’ refusal to allow Ethiopia to control the three names of its coffees might end up hurting the reputation of the company as well as spark activists against globalization & “Trade Injustice” around the world. This current case might add new recruits to their cause, which is a new development that can escalate quickly and become a concern for many other international corporations. “Trade Injustice” is one of the various issues organizations like CORPWATCH monitor in order to help poor nations stand up against unfair inter...

Human rights groups are the latest voices accusing Starbucks of its indecency and for abusing its market power, a style widely seen as dictating a remotely controlled colonial market system. Despite consumers' repeated calls for Starbucks to honor its promises to coffee growers, the company refused to budge from its position of blocking Ethiopia’s plan to trademark its gourmet coffees in the US markets. The dispute over Ethiopia’s coffee names unmasked the disingenuous business ethics deeply rooted in the corporate world. Starbucks prides itself as a leader of “Corporate Social Responsibility” in the industry. After CEO Jim Donald’s visit to Ethiopia, the company said that it "is committed to working with the Ethiopian government to find a solution that supports the Ethiopian coffee farmer." In reality, this commitment is translated into the company’s denying of poor coffee farmers’ of a rare opportunity that could change their lives. Ethiopia, paradoxically stereo-typed ...

What are the economic reasons why Starbucks is unyielding to Ethiopia's rights to the names Sidamo and Harar? Do companies, such as Starbucks have rights to deny farmers of their cultural heritages? Analysis coming up soon. Related: To read Starbucks' responses, click here . For Oxfam's recent call to Starbucks, please read this . For an independent analysis on the dispute, please click here .