Poor Farmer

Part I. This is a transcript of the UK Members of Parliament questioning Starbucks and others. In this edition, only a section pertinent to the trademark dispute between Ethiopia and Starbucks is published. Future postings will present the other sections related to Fair Trade and other topics. --------------- UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 356-i House of COMMONS MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FAIR TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT Tuesday 27 February 2007 MS SANDRA TAYLOR, MR CLIFF BURROWS and MR MIKE BARRY Evidence heard in Public Questions 1 - 82 Oral Evidence Taken before the International Development Committee on Tuesday 27 February 2007 Members present Malcolm Bruce, in the Chair John Barrett John Battle John Bercow Richard Burden James Duddridge Ann McKechin Joan Ruddock Mr Marsha Singh Examination of Witnesses Witnesses: Ms Sandra Taylor, Senior Vice President, Corporate Social Responsibility, Starbucks Coffee Company, ...

Is Starbucks "The Coffee That Cares?" - Baristas And Coffee Farmers Demand Living Wages - Baristas Demand The Right To Organize - Coffee Farmers Demand Ethiopian Trademarks - Coffee Farmers Demand A Share Of Retail Sales Join Us For A Celebration Of Resistance At The Starbucks Annual Meeting Wednesday, March 21 @ 9 A.M. Marion Oliver Mccaw Hall At The Seattle Center Mercer Street, Between Third And Fourth Avenues Seattle, Washington Want To Learn More? Come To A Screening Of Black Gold And Make Signs Friday March 16th @ 6pm Cascade People's Center 309 Pontius Avenue North Seattle, Washington For more info or to get involved contact organizer Tomer Malchi at 646-753-1167 Baristas At Starbucks Demand Justice In contrast to Starbucks' socially responsible image, Barista Sarah Bender's story illustrates the dark side of its force. When she started in 2004 in Manhattan, she was paid $7.75 an hour; she now earns $10.10. Initially, she got from 20 to 35 hours of work...

The Lawyers' Angle Starbucks fights plan to license famous regional names, but then moves to mollify; both sides take campaign to YouTube By Alexia Garamfalvi Legal Times March 5, 2007 Robert Winter, a senior partner at Arnold & Porter, probably never thought he’d be pushing his client’s point of view on YouTube when he agreed to help the government of Ethiopia protect the intellectual property associated with the names of three of its most famous coffee-growing regions. But last week he defended the country’s initiative to trademark and license the coffee names in a video posted on the site . It was a response to a widely viewed video posted in December by Dub Hay, Starbucks Coffee Co. senior vice president, claiming the trademark and licensing scheme was illegal. “It’s plain silly — there’s nothing illegal at all,” Winter says in a grainy video of him in his office, responding to questions that flash on the screen. The video’s format and typical low-budget YouTube aesthetic ...

Chain's Image Rattled By Trademark Spat; Hints of Chocolate, Rum About a year ago, Starbucks’ lack of responsiveness to the Ethiopian government’s request to drop its application for Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo coffee and to discuss the licensing agreement was grating. Even after the dispute came to the public’s attention, the company has been dragging its feet and misleading the public. As the following report reveals, the company is still pursuing their intransigent actions by trying to persuade Ethiopia to buy into the company’s good-will. At the outset of the public campaign to pressure Starbucks to respect the Ethiopia’s farmers and come to the table to discuss the issue, some feared that Starbucks would stop buying coffee from Ethiopia, thereby hurting the farmers. Those familiar with the company’s behavior said, it was unlike Starbucks to seek revenge in public. Also, they argued, Starbucks is expanding and needs more of Ethiopia’s coffees to supply the thousands of stor...

Starbucks’ officials have so far been successful in concealing the company's unfair business practices under the touted Coffee and Farmers Equity (CAFÉ) Practice - a PR tool which has given the wrong impression to consumers and shareholders that the company was doing its business in a “socially responsible” manner. In reality, while Starbucks scores record profits, the farmers are trapped in a vicious circle of poverty. Starbucks is mindful of its own profits with little regard to the people behind its brand. According to the the Wall Street Journal (subscription), Starbucks officials are satisfied with their relationship with the farmers and are thankful of the "gift": "I looked everyone in the eye and shook their hand and said, 'Thank you for giving us this wonderful product,'" recalls Dub Hay, the Starbucks executive. "It's one of the more special things I've ever experienced." In the report, “ Starbucks vs. Ethiopia ,” posted here...

The chain's image has suffered in its trademark fight with the Ethiopian government. By Dominic Rushe in New York The Sunday Times March 04, 2007 LAST Friday was an annual holiday in Ethiopia to commemorate the Battle of Adowa in 1896 and the routing of Italian forces at the end of the first Italo-Abyssinian war. Holiday or no holiday, the prime minister, Meles Zanawi, spent part of the day drawing up his defences in another battle, one that has occupied the country for the past two years — a fight with Starbucks over the impoverished country’s famous coffee. This is a truly modern engagement, fired by the forces of globalisation and fought with lawyers. But according to Starbucks’s critics, it tells an ancient tale, with the coffee chain branded as a modern-day colonialist exploiting Ethiopia’s 1,000-year-old coffee culture. Fittingly enough, the fight is being played out on that most modern of battlegrounds — the video website YouTube. Coffee is Ethiopia’s largest export, and the...

What's in a name? Ethiopia's battle against Starbucks Foreign Policy February 28, 2007 Ethiopia, fed up with getting short-changed when selling its popular coffee products to the West, has been in legal conflict with Starbucks since 2005. Ethiopia complains that while a pound of coffee sold in the United States nets Ethiopian farmers about $1, the same pound of coffee sells for $26 at Starbucks under the name "Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo." Ethiopia argues that the high price for its coffee is not just the result of roasting, packaging or marketing in the United States, but because there is something consumers intrinsically value in Ethiopian coffee. Ethiopia is frustrated that it hasn't been able to capitalize on the "intellectual property" of its coffee-producing regions, and wants that to change. In March 2005, Ethiopia filed a case with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to trademark the names of three of its renowned coffee-producing regions (Yirga...