As a Starbucks customer, I'm concerned about your opposition to Ethiopia's right to own its coffee names. I am asking Starbucks to honor its commitment to farmers by signing an agreement with Ethiopia that recognizes the country's rights to the names of its coffees. If Starbucks and other companies sign such agreements, estimates suggest that Ethiopian's could see up to $88 million of extra income a year.
Ethiopia ranks among the poorest countries in the world; more than 25 percent of its population lives on less than $1 per day. About 15 million people in Ethiopia depend on coffee to make a living, the majority of them growing their crop on small plots of about two and a half acres.
Meanwhile, coffee lovers pay up to $26 per pound for fine Ethiopian coffees because they're willing to pay for high quality and great taste. Ethiopian farmers, however, often earn just 5-10 percent of the retail value.
With this disparity in mind, the Ethiopian government launched a project to get legal ownership of its fine coffee names - Sidamo, Yirgacheffe, and Harar. By owning the names, Ethiopia will be able to occupy a stronger negotiating position with foreign buyers, capture a larger share of the market value associated with those names, and protect the reputations of its brand names. In a country with a per capita income of around $100 per year, that amount of money could have a profound impact on the lives of millions of Ethiopians.
As you know, Ethiopia approached Starbucks more than a year ago asking the company to lead by example and to discuss an agreement that would acknowledge Ethiopia's ownership of these names. So far, Starbucks has refused to sign the agreement, or even talk seriously about it with the Ethiopian government.
I want to see Starbucks do the right thing by the poor farmers who grow its coffee. I urge you to sign the licensing agreement and recognize Ethiopia's rightful ownership of its coffee names.
Signed by:
[Your name]
[Your address]
Please sign the petition
News and views on Ethiopia's finest specialty coffees - Sidamo, Harar, Yirgacheffe and Others
Tell Starbucks to Give Ethiopian Farmers Their Fair Share (Media Rights)
Each year, coffee companies make billions of dollars. Starbucks alone earned almost $5.8 billion in net revenues during the first three quarters of 2006.
With as many as 15 million Ethiopians dependent on coffee, Ethiopia has decided to get its farmers more of what they deserve. The country's government has asked Starbucks to sign a licensing agreement that will allow Ethiopia to control the names of its coffees. That way, Ethiopia can help determine an export price that makes sure farmers see a larger share of the profits enabling them to feed their children, send them to school and get them better healthcare.
Oxfam and a coalition of allies are asking Starbucks to sign this agreement. According to one coalition member, control of the name brands could increase Ethiopia's coffee export income by $88 million annually. This money could go a long way to help lift millions of Ethiopians out of poverty.
So please, help us convince Starbucks to sign this agreement with Ethiopia. Poor farmers deserve a fair share of the profits.
http://act.oxfamamerica.org/campaign/starbucks_petition
Starts
Ends
Issues
Economic Justice, International, Labor, Agriculture, Africa
Homepage
act.oxfamamerica.org
Contact
Posted on December 5, 2006 in Event / Call to action by leahs
With as many as 15 million Ethiopians dependent on coffee, Ethiopia has decided to get its farmers more of what they deserve. The country's government has asked Starbucks to sign a licensing agreement that will allow Ethiopia to control the names of its coffees. That way, Ethiopia can help determine an export price that makes sure farmers see a larger share of the profits enabling them to feed their children, send them to school and get them better healthcare.
Oxfam and a coalition of allies are asking Starbucks to sign this agreement. According to one coalition member, control of the name brands could increase Ethiopia's coffee export income by $88 million annually. This money could go a long way to help lift millions of Ethiopians out of poverty.
So please, help us convince Starbucks to sign this agreement with Ethiopia. Poor farmers deserve a fair share of the profits.
http://act.oxfamamerica.org/campaign/starbucks_petition
Starts
Ends
Issues
Economic Justice, International, Labor, Agriculture, Africa
Homepage
act.oxfamamerica.org
Contact
Posted on December 5, 2006 in Event / Call to action by leahs
Talks between Starbucks and the Ethiopian Government Positive and Ongoing (CSR Wire)
(CSRwire) SEATTLE--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 30, 2006--This week Starbucks ceo Jim Donald and his executive team had positive meetings with African coffee farmers, producers and government officials in Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Ethiopia. In particular during the meetings in Ethiopia, Starbucks and government officials discussed the government's initiative to protect its specialty coffee names. The parties used these meetings as the first step in developing a solution. Starbucks fully supports the premise that any protection of specialty coffee names in Ethiopia should benefit Ethiopian coffee farmers.
"We were grateful for the opportunity to meet with the Ethiopian Prime Minister Melese Zenawi to talk about how we can work together on initiatives that will benefit coffee farmers," said Jim Donald, Starbucks president and ceo. "We believe the meeting was very cooperative and productive and we are committed to working with the Ethiopian government to find a solution that supports the Ethiopian coffee farmer."
As stated in the press release issued on Nov. 29, 2006 by the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office, "both parties agreed to cooperate and work together in the protection and use of the Intellectual Property Rights of Ethiopia's specialty coffee names and for Starbucks to promote high quality Ethiopian coffees."
For more detailed information about Starbucks relationship with Ethiopian coffee farmers, please visit http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/pressdesc.asp?id=713.http://www.businesswire.com/cnn/sbux.shtml
"We were grateful for the opportunity to meet with the Ethiopian Prime Minister Melese Zenawi to talk about how we can work together on initiatives that will benefit coffee farmers," said Jim Donald, Starbucks president and ceo. "We believe the meeting was very cooperative and productive and we are committed to working with the Ethiopian government to find a solution that supports the Ethiopian coffee farmer."
As stated in the press release issued on Nov. 29, 2006 by the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office, "both parties agreed to cooperate and work together in the protection and use of the Intellectual Property Rights of Ethiopia's specialty coffee names and for Starbucks to promote high quality Ethiopian coffees."
For more detailed information about Starbucks relationship with Ethiopian coffee farmers, please visit http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/pressdesc.asp?id=713.http://www.businesswire.com/cnn/sbux.shtml
‘Unethical Starbucks to lose customers’
Addis Ababa – United States coffee giant Starbucks’ row with Ethiopia entered a new dimension after an Oxford academic said its unethical behaviour would make it lose face with its educated middle-class customers.
Douglas Holt, the L’Oréal Professor of Marketing at Oxford University’s Saïd Business School, said the coffee house’s “rash attempt to shut down Ethiopia’s [trademark] applications” would hurt the ethical brand the company has tried to create.
Ethiopia had applied to trademark its most famous coffee names, Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe, to enable it to capture more value from trade, control their use and allow farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price.
Last month charity group Oxfam said that Starbucks’ attempts to derail the application, by asking the National Coffee Association of USA Inc. to oppose approval of the trademarks, could deny producers an estimated £47mn (about $88.5mn) a year. It added that Ethiopian farmers earn as little as $0.75 for a pound of beans, which Starbucks earned up to $26 a pound for.
Holt said that Starbucks’ unethical blocking of the application would lose the company more than any rise in prices as customers switched brands. However, convenience would probably make this unlikely.
Starbucks has denied that it was attempting to influence the application, but said that trademarks were not the best way to help growers and that a kind of certification should be employed instead.
However the director-general of the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office, Getachew Mengistie, said that Addis Ababa had found trademarks were more likely to strengthen the position of farmers to enable them to earn a fair price for their efforts.
Starbucks’ chief executive Jim Donald was allegedly preparing to meet with Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. The two would sit as almost equals. Ethiopia’s GDP was $11.2bn, while Starbucks’ annual revenues sat at $7.8bn. -Business in Africa Online
Douglas Holt, the L’Oréal Professor of Marketing at Oxford University’s Saïd Business School, said the coffee house’s “rash attempt to shut down Ethiopia’s [trademark] applications” would hurt the ethical brand the company has tried to create.
Ethiopia had applied to trademark its most famous coffee names, Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe, to enable it to capture more value from trade, control their use and allow farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price.
Last month charity group Oxfam said that Starbucks’ attempts to derail the application, by asking the National Coffee Association of USA Inc. to oppose approval of the trademarks, could deny producers an estimated £47mn (about $88.5mn) a year. It added that Ethiopian farmers earn as little as $0.75 for a pound of beans, which Starbucks earned up to $26 a pound for.
Holt said that Starbucks’ unethical blocking of the application would lose the company more than any rise in prices as customers switched brands. However, convenience would probably make this unlikely.
Starbucks has denied that it was attempting to influence the application, but said that trademarks were not the best way to help growers and that a kind of certification should be employed instead.
However the director-general of the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office, Getachew Mengistie, said that Addis Ababa had found trademarks were more likely to strengthen the position of farmers to enable them to earn a fair price for their efforts.
Starbucks’ chief executive Jim Donald was allegedly preparing to meet with Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. The two would sit as almost equals. Ethiopia’s GDP was $11.2bn, while Starbucks’ annual revenues sat at $7.8bn. -Business in Africa Online
Ethiopian coffee trademark dispute may leave Starbucks with nasty taste (The Times)
Madeleine Acey, Enterprise Editor, Times Online
Academic warns American chain that customers will go elsewhere if it places profit before ethics
Starbucks was accused yesterday of “playing Russian roulette” with its brand as a row over prices for Ethiopian coffee farmers intensified.
As an Oxford academic lambasted the American coffee shops chain, Jim Donald, Starbucks’ chief executive, was preparing to visit Ethiopia tomorrow for talks with Meles Zenawi, its Prime Minister, The Times has learnt.
Douglas Holt, the L’Oréal Professor of Marketing at Oxford University’s Saïd Business School, accused Starbucks of hypocrisy and abuse of power and said that the company was in danger of damaging its name among its educated middle-class customers by opposing Addis Ababa’s attempts to trademark Ethiopia’s coffee varieties in the United States.
The international coffee chain had worked hard to cultivate a progressive image, selling fair trade and “ethical” products and promoting sustainable development among the poorest coffee-growers, he said.
“In their rash attempt to shut down Ethiopia’s applications, [Starbucks] have placed the Starbucks brand in significant peril. Starbucks customers will be shocked by the disconnect between their current perceptions of Starbucks’ ethics and the company’s actions against Ethiopia,” he said.
He claimed that Starbucks’ stance was likely to hit profits much harder than any price rises brought about by trademarking.
Oxfam said last month that the Ethiopian growers selling to Starbucks earned between 75 cents and $1.60 a pound on beans that Starbucks sold at up to $26 (£13.40) a pound. The aid organisation issued a strongly worded statement accusing Starbucks of actively blocking Ethiopia’s trademark bid.
Starbucks, in turn, denied this and issued a statement demanding that Oxfam stop its attack. Oxfam took out full-page advertisements on the issue in The New York Times and two Seattle-based newspapers.
Starbucks said that trademarks were not the best way to help growers and suggested a regional certification alternative that it said was used in many countries to brand premium food and wine. It made no sense, the company said, for trademarks to be geographically based, as in the Ethiopian application for three regional names. Starbucks added that it consistently paid premium bean prices and that between 2002 and 2006 it had quadrupled its Ethiopian coffee purchases.
“We support the recognition of the source of our coffees and have a deep appreciation for the farmers that grow them,” the company said. “We are committed to working collaboratively and continuing dialogue with key stakeholders to find a solution that benefits Ethiopian coffee farmers. We have had recent conversations with Oxfam about planning logistics for a stakeholder summit.
“Our investment in social development projects and providing access to affordable loans . . . has been recognised for its leadership within the industry,” it said.
Getachew Mengistie, the director-general of the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office, said that Addis Ababa had studied the merits of both trademarks and certification and found that trademarks would strengthen the position of farmers, enabling them to get a reasonable return for their product.
Professor Holt said: “With a certification mark, Starbucks and other Western coffee marketers would still have full control over Ethiopian coffee brands.” Trademarks would require licences for companies wanting to use the names — giving the coffee producers a commercial asset that they could control.
Starbucks declined to confirm or deny Mr Donald’s visit. Oxfam said that it had invited supporters to fax Mr Donald in protest and that more than 70,000 people had done so.
“Speciality coffees in other regions of the world can get up to 45 per cent of the retail price, compared with the 5 to 10 per cent Ethiopians are currently receiving,” Oxfam said. “We’re meeting with Starbucks again next week and are hoping there can be progress.” Ethiopia’s growers could earn $88 million (£45 million) more per year with trademarks, it said.
Starbucks declined to respond directly to Professor Holt’s comments.
Brian Smith, research fellow at Cranfield University and author of Guarding the Brand, questioned Professor Holt’s assertions. He said that Western consumers had limited sympathy with subsistence farmers in Africa and although they might be prepared to pay 5p more for a fair trade latte, they might not walk an extra 50 yards to another coffee shop to avoid Starbucks and its policy on trademarks.
“I don’t see this doing Starbucks significant long-lasting harm . . . Starbucks will handle this in an intelligent manner, offering an alternative,” he said.
Crucial brew
$11.2bn
Ethiopia’s GDP
$7.8bn
Starbucks’ annual revenues
12,400
Number of Starbucks coffee shops worldwide
15 million
Number of Ethiopians reliant on the coffee trade
54%
Percentage of Ethiopia’s GDP that is coffee
90%
Percentage of Ethiopia’s exports that are coffee
80%
Perecentage of Ethiopians living on $2 or less a day
Source: The Times
Academic warns American chain that customers will go elsewhere if it places profit before ethics
Starbucks was accused yesterday of “playing Russian roulette” with its brand as a row over prices for Ethiopian coffee farmers intensified.
As an Oxford academic lambasted the American coffee shops chain, Jim Donald, Starbucks’ chief executive, was preparing to visit Ethiopia tomorrow for talks with Meles Zenawi, its Prime Minister, The Times has learnt.
Douglas Holt, the L’Oréal Professor of Marketing at Oxford University’s Saïd Business School, accused Starbucks of hypocrisy and abuse of power and said that the company was in danger of damaging its name among its educated middle-class customers by opposing Addis Ababa’s attempts to trademark Ethiopia’s coffee varieties in the United States.
The international coffee chain had worked hard to cultivate a progressive image, selling fair trade and “ethical” products and promoting sustainable development among the poorest coffee-growers, he said.
“In their rash attempt to shut down Ethiopia’s applications, [Starbucks] have placed the Starbucks brand in significant peril. Starbucks customers will be shocked by the disconnect between their current perceptions of Starbucks’ ethics and the company’s actions against Ethiopia,” he said.
He claimed that Starbucks’ stance was likely to hit profits much harder than any price rises brought about by trademarking.
Oxfam said last month that the Ethiopian growers selling to Starbucks earned between 75 cents and $1.60 a pound on beans that Starbucks sold at up to $26 (£13.40) a pound. The aid organisation issued a strongly worded statement accusing Starbucks of actively blocking Ethiopia’s trademark bid.
Starbucks, in turn, denied this and issued a statement demanding that Oxfam stop its attack. Oxfam took out full-page advertisements on the issue in The New York Times and two Seattle-based newspapers.
Starbucks said that trademarks were not the best way to help growers and suggested a regional certification alternative that it said was used in many countries to brand premium food and wine. It made no sense, the company said, for trademarks to be geographically based, as in the Ethiopian application for three regional names. Starbucks added that it consistently paid premium bean prices and that between 2002 and 2006 it had quadrupled its Ethiopian coffee purchases.
“We support the recognition of the source of our coffees and have a deep appreciation for the farmers that grow them,” the company said. “We are committed to working collaboratively and continuing dialogue with key stakeholders to find a solution that benefits Ethiopian coffee farmers. We have had recent conversations with Oxfam about planning logistics for a stakeholder summit.
“Our investment in social development projects and providing access to affordable loans . . . has been recognised for its leadership within the industry,” it said.
Getachew Mengistie, the director-general of the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office, said that Addis Ababa had studied the merits of both trademarks and certification and found that trademarks would strengthen the position of farmers, enabling them to get a reasonable return for their product.
Professor Holt said: “With a certification mark, Starbucks and other Western coffee marketers would still have full control over Ethiopian coffee brands.” Trademarks would require licences for companies wanting to use the names — giving the coffee producers a commercial asset that they could control.
Starbucks declined to confirm or deny Mr Donald’s visit. Oxfam said that it had invited supporters to fax Mr Donald in protest and that more than 70,000 people had done so.
“Speciality coffees in other regions of the world can get up to 45 per cent of the retail price, compared with the 5 to 10 per cent Ethiopians are currently receiving,” Oxfam said. “We’re meeting with Starbucks again next week and are hoping there can be progress.” Ethiopia’s growers could earn $88 million (£45 million) more per year with trademarks, it said.
Starbucks declined to respond directly to Professor Holt’s comments.
Brian Smith, research fellow at Cranfield University and author of Guarding the Brand, questioned Professor Holt’s assertions. He said that Western consumers had limited sympathy with subsistence farmers in Africa and although they might be prepared to pay 5p more for a fair trade latte, they might not walk an extra 50 yards to another coffee shop to avoid Starbucks and its policy on trademarks.
“I don’t see this doing Starbucks significant long-lasting harm . . . Starbucks will handle this in an intelligent manner, offering an alternative,” he said.
Crucial brew
$11.2bn
Ethiopia’s GDP
$7.8bn
Starbucks’ annual revenues
12,400
Number of Starbucks coffee shops worldwide
15 million
Number of Ethiopians reliant on the coffee trade
54%
Percentage of Ethiopia’s GDP that is coffee
90%
Percentage of Ethiopia’s exports that are coffee
80%
Perecentage of Ethiopians living on $2 or less a day
Source: The Times
Starbucks 'blocks' Ethiopian coffee bid (Reuters)
Starbucks has been accused of preventing Ethiopia from trademarking its coffee, denying farmers potential income of about $94 million.
The Seattle company denies any wrongdoing
Oxfam, a British charity, said on Tuesday that the US coffee shop giant, which had a turnover of $7.8 billion in the year to October 1, prevented Ethiopia from securing trademark protection for two of its best-known beans, Sidamo and Harar.
Had Ethiopia been successful, it would have allowed the impoverished country to control the use of the beans in the market, giving its farmers a bigger share of the retail price, the charity said.
Ethiopia's foreign ministry said in a statement: "Securing the trademark for its Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe coffee beans could have allowed the country to increase its negotiation leverage through control of the names and ultimately drive a greater share of the retail price in the global market."
Starbucks denied being behind the blocking bid by the US National Coffee Association (NCA) at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
"We have not been involved in trying to block Ethiopia's attempts. We did not get the NCA involved - in fact it was the other way around. They were the ones who contacted us on this," the company's Dub Hay told BBC radio.
Blocking action
NCA head, Robert Nelson backed Hay, Starbucks' senior vice-president in charge of procurement, telling the programme the NCA was contacted by a third party.
But Oxfam said it believed Starbucks was the instigator of the blocking action.
"We have heard from a number of sources that actually Starbucks was involved in alerting the US coffee association to block these applications," the charity's Jo Leadbetter said.
It "stinks of corporate bullying" she told the BBC.
Licensing agreements
The charity said Starbucks and other coffee companies should sign voluntary licensing agreements to acknowledge Ethiopia's ownership of the coffee names, regardless of whether trademark protection has been issued.
"Coffee shops can sell Sidamo and Harar coffees for up to GBP14 a pound because of the beans' specialty status," said Tadesse Maskela, head of the Oromia Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union in Ethiopia.
"But Ethiopian coffee farmers only earn between 30p and 59p [per pound] for their crop, barely enough to cover the cost of production," Maskela said in a statement.
Girma Balcha, head of biodiversity at Ethiopia's ministry of agriculture and rural development, said Starbucks' use of Ethiopian coffee names without his government's prior consent violated the International Convention on Biodiversity.
"In the absence of such an agreement, Starbucks has no legal background to use Ethiopian coffee names as a brand to enhance its coffee business," Girma told reporters in Addis Ababa.
Source: Al Jazeera
The Seattle company denies any wrongdoing
Oxfam, a British charity, said on Tuesday that the US coffee shop giant, which had a turnover of $7.8 billion in the year to October 1, prevented Ethiopia from securing trademark protection for two of its best-known beans, Sidamo and Harar.
Had Ethiopia been successful, it would have allowed the impoverished country to control the use of the beans in the market, giving its farmers a bigger share of the retail price, the charity said.
Ethiopia's foreign ministry said in a statement: "Securing the trademark for its Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe coffee beans could have allowed the country to increase its negotiation leverage through control of the names and ultimately drive a greater share of the retail price in the global market."
Starbucks denied being behind the blocking bid by the US National Coffee Association (NCA) at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
"We have not been involved in trying to block Ethiopia's attempts. We did not get the NCA involved - in fact it was the other way around. They were the ones who contacted us on this," the company's Dub Hay told BBC radio.
Blocking action
NCA head, Robert Nelson backed Hay, Starbucks' senior vice-president in charge of procurement, telling the programme the NCA was contacted by a third party.
But Oxfam said it believed Starbucks was the instigator of the blocking action.
"We have heard from a number of sources that actually Starbucks was involved in alerting the US coffee association to block these applications," the charity's Jo Leadbetter said.
It "stinks of corporate bullying" she told the BBC.
Licensing agreements
The charity said Starbucks and other coffee companies should sign voluntary licensing agreements to acknowledge Ethiopia's ownership of the coffee names, regardless of whether trademark protection has been issued.
"Coffee shops can sell Sidamo and Harar coffees for up to GBP14 a pound because of the beans' specialty status," said Tadesse Maskela, head of the Oromia Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union in Ethiopia.
"But Ethiopian coffee farmers only earn between 30p and 59p [per pound] for their crop, barely enough to cover the cost of production," Maskela said in a statement.
Girma Balcha, head of biodiversity at Ethiopia's ministry of agriculture and rural development, said Starbucks' use of Ethiopian coffee names without his government's prior consent violated the International Convention on Biodiversity.
"In the absence of such an agreement, Starbucks has no legal background to use Ethiopian coffee names as a brand to enhance its coffee business," Girma told reporters in Addis Ababa.
Source: Al Jazeera
Global Day of Action Against Starbucks (Starbucks Union)
Starbucks Workers Demand the Right to Organize!
This November 24th-25th, stand in solidarity with Starbucks workers as we call for an end to the anti-union campaign waged by Starbucks and for the reinstatement of all unlawfully fired workers. In addition we are calling on Starbucks to give Ethiopia control over its coffee.
Starbucks workers around the country and the world are organizing to make our jobs better and finally have a real, independent voice at work. A powerful voice that our managers, even the whole company, have no choice but to listen too. By organizing a union baristas in NYC and Chicago have seen our wages increased, schedules stabilized and respect from our bosses. Over the last two years, however, Starbucks has consistently responded to workers organizing with harassment, intimidation and illegal firings. A National Labor Relations Board settlement was reached in March of 2006 that reinstated two workers and forced Starbucks to pay back wages and change discriminatory policies. The Settlement did little to stop the anti-union campaign and since December of 2005 five workers in NYC were unlawfully fired for engaging in protected union activity.
Joseph Agins fired from Starbucks at 2nd ave and 9th, December 12th 2005
Charles Fostrom fired from Starbucks at 57th and Lexington, July 11th 2006
Evan Winterscheidt fired from Starbucks at 14th and 6th ave, July 18th 2006
Daniel Gross fired from Starbucks at 36th and Madison, August 5th 2006
Isis Saenz fired from Starbucks at 57th and Lexington, November 1st 2006
The IWW Starbucks workers union is calling for action. On November 24th-25th union members and supporters will be taking action to demand reinstatement of all five fired workers and an end to the Anti-union campaign.
The IWW Starbucks Workers Union is building solidarity across the coffee industry. We are calling on Starbucks to sign an agreement that acknowledges Ethiopia's ownership of its coffee names. Securing the rights to names such as Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe would enable Ethiopia's coffee industry and farmers to earn an additional $88 million per year.
* Coffee makes up 40-50% of Ethiopia's export income;
* 15 million Ethiopians are dependent on the coffee trade;
* One in four people live on less than $1 a day and 80% of its people live on less than $2 a day; and
* Ethiopia ranks in the bottom 10 of the UN human development index of income, health and education.
If Starbucks is genuine in its commitment to farmers it will sign the licensing agreement Ethiopia has offered.
For more info visit starbucksunion.org
To get involved in your area please contact:
Eastern US: Tomer (646) 753-1167 Tomer.IWW@gmail.com
Midwest: Joe - (815) 545-5273 unionmadelattes@gmail.com
Western US: Johannah - (646) 541-8921 rebelgurley@yahoo.com
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.starbucksunion.org/trackback/1109
This November 24th-25th, stand in solidarity with Starbucks workers as we call for an end to the anti-union campaign waged by Starbucks and for the reinstatement of all unlawfully fired workers. In addition we are calling on Starbucks to give Ethiopia control over its coffee.
Starbucks workers around the country and the world are organizing to make our jobs better and finally have a real, independent voice at work. A powerful voice that our managers, even the whole company, have no choice but to listen too. By organizing a union baristas in NYC and Chicago have seen our wages increased, schedules stabilized and respect from our bosses. Over the last two years, however, Starbucks has consistently responded to workers organizing with harassment, intimidation and illegal firings. A National Labor Relations Board settlement was reached in March of 2006 that reinstated two workers and forced Starbucks to pay back wages and change discriminatory policies. The Settlement did little to stop the anti-union campaign and since December of 2005 five workers in NYC were unlawfully fired for engaging in protected union activity.
Joseph Agins fired from Starbucks at 2nd ave and 9th, December 12th 2005
Charles Fostrom fired from Starbucks at 57th and Lexington, July 11th 2006
Evan Winterscheidt fired from Starbucks at 14th and 6th ave, July 18th 2006
Daniel Gross fired from Starbucks at 36th and Madison, August 5th 2006
Isis Saenz fired from Starbucks at 57th and Lexington, November 1st 2006
The IWW Starbucks workers union is calling for action. On November 24th-25th union members and supporters will be taking action to demand reinstatement of all five fired workers and an end to the Anti-union campaign.
The IWW Starbucks Workers Union is building solidarity across the coffee industry. We are calling on Starbucks to sign an agreement that acknowledges Ethiopia's ownership of its coffee names. Securing the rights to names such as Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe would enable Ethiopia's coffee industry and farmers to earn an additional $88 million per year.
* Coffee makes up 40-50% of Ethiopia's export income;
* 15 million Ethiopians are dependent on the coffee trade;
* One in four people live on less than $1 a day and 80% of its people live on less than $2 a day; and
* Ethiopia ranks in the bottom 10 of the UN human development index of income, health and education.
If Starbucks is genuine in its commitment to farmers it will sign the licensing agreement Ethiopia has offered.
For more info visit starbucksunion.org
To get involved in your area please contact:
Eastern US: Tomer (646) 753-1167 Tomer.IWW@gmail.com
Midwest: Joe - (815) 545-5273 unionmadelattes@gmail.com
Western US: Johannah - (646) 541-8921 rebelgurley@yahoo.com
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.starbucksunion.org/trackback/1109
Ethiopia is the birthplace of coffee : A Brief History
The Legend of Kaldi
Once upon a time, in a faraway land called Ethiopia —or maybe Abyssinia, it was a very long time ago, after all— there lived a young goatherd named Kaldi.
By all accounts (and there are many, as the story has been retold many, many times) Kaldi was a very responsible young man, and not one to do foolish things. Every day Kaldi would set his goats to grazing in the hills that surrounded his village, and every evening his loyal goats would return home. This, of course, would suggest that the goats were the responsible parties. How foolish is it, after all, to just turn your goats loose into the hills every morning? But, back to our story...
One evening, Kaldi's goats did not return home. The young man, no doubt feeling a little foolish by now, searched for his herd all through the night, and as morning broke he found them, leaping and dancing with reckless abandon and apparent glee round a stand of shiny, dark-leafed shrubs with bright red berries. Kaldi took in the scene before him, amazed. He soon decided it must be the berries that caused such reckless behavior in his otherwise responsible goats, and — forgetting everything his mother told him about eating strange foods from strange places — Kaldi sampled the berries, himself. In no time, he too was dancing gleefully with his goats around the green-leafed shrubs.
Soon, we are told, a wise and learned man passed by —an imam, or monk— trudging sleepily on his way to prayer. The imam rubbed his eyes and took in the scene before him —Kaldi and his goats— dancing gleefully about a stand of shiny, dark-leafed shrubs with bright red berries.
Being both a curious and learned man, the imam gathered some of these berries, himself, and on returning home he studied them. In his experiments with the bright red berries, he roasted them, boiled them and sampled the resulting beverage. He shared what he found with the rest of his fellow monks, and soon none fell asleep at prayers! And so coffee spread from place to place, creating a more gleeful, and wakeful, world.
So what of Kaldi? Perhaps he and his goats are dancing, still.
Source: Green Mountain Coffee Roasters
Once upon a time, in a faraway land called Ethiopia —or maybe Abyssinia, it was a very long time ago, after all— there lived a young goatherd named Kaldi.
By all accounts (and there are many, as the story has been retold many, many times) Kaldi was a very responsible young man, and not one to do foolish things. Every day Kaldi would set his goats to grazing in the hills that surrounded his village, and every evening his loyal goats would return home. This, of course, would suggest that the goats were the responsible parties. How foolish is it, after all, to just turn your goats loose into the hills every morning? But, back to our story...
One evening, Kaldi's goats did not return home. The young man, no doubt feeling a little foolish by now, searched for his herd all through the night, and as morning broke he found them, leaping and dancing with reckless abandon and apparent glee round a stand of shiny, dark-leafed shrubs with bright red berries. Kaldi took in the scene before him, amazed. He soon decided it must be the berries that caused such reckless behavior in his otherwise responsible goats, and — forgetting everything his mother told him about eating strange foods from strange places — Kaldi sampled the berries, himself. In no time, he too was dancing gleefully with his goats around the green-leafed shrubs.
Soon, we are told, a wise and learned man passed by —an imam, or monk— trudging sleepily on his way to prayer. The imam rubbed his eyes and took in the scene before him —Kaldi and his goats— dancing gleefully about a stand of shiny, dark-leafed shrubs with bright red berries.
Being both a curious and learned man, the imam gathered some of these berries, himself, and on returning home he studied them. In his experiments with the bright red berries, he roasted them, boiled them and sampled the resulting beverage. He shared what he found with the rest of his fellow monks, and soon none fell asleep at prayers! And so coffee spread from place to place, creating a more gleeful, and wakeful, world.
So what of Kaldi? Perhaps he and his goats are dancing, still.
Source: Green Mountain Coffee Roasters
Review: Black Gold
Posted Nov 9th 2006 3:32PM by Jeffrey M. Anderson
Filed under: Documentary, New Releases, Theatrical Reviews
I love coffee. And I'm not talking about your double-half-caff-latte-with-a-twist. I'm talking black coffee, nothing in it. Why drown the taste with sugar and cream? Isn't that like dumping ice cubes in your Pinot Noir? I've been grinding my own beans and brewing my own coffee for years. I know which brands I like, and I try to buy 'Fair Trade' when I can. But ultimately what I really know about coffee could only fill about half a cup.
That's where the new documentary Black Gold, now in limited release, comes in. First-time filmmakers (and brothers) Marc and Nick Francis travel the world over to capture images of coffee plantations, coffee farmers and loving hands carefully caressing piles of unroasted beans. But if this were merely a documentary about the process of bean fields-to-Starbucks, it wouldn't be playing in theaters. No, Black Gold is actually the year's 1000th passive political documentary about how horrible the world is. In Ethiopia, where some of the the finest coffee in the world is harvested, farmers get the equivalent of pennies per sack, whereas, halfway around the world, Westerners pay up to three dollars per cup. Fortunately the film didn't make me feel guilty enough to give up coffee, and it does offer a small, simple response -- if not a solution -- available to nearly anyone in this country.
With Black Gold, the brothers reveal an inquisitive filmic style, exploring and following characters rather than grilling them with interview questions. And, like the best documentaries, they have found a compelling lead character with Tadesse Meskela, who in Ethiopia represents a giant co-op, encompassing 74 farms and over 70,000 farmers. Meskela travels all over, from London to Seattle and New York (where the coffee prices are set) inspecting sacks of beans and meeting with potential buyers. In one heartbreaking scene, he visits a typical supermarket, trying to find at least one bag of coffee that was grown by his farmers. The film presents Meskela as a likable, passionate, highly educated fellow; at home, his wife praises his dedication and complains about his constant absence.
In another subplot, the Francis brothers show how many farmers are giving up coffee growing altogether, simply because they can no longer feed their families on the meager profits. Rather, they are using their land to grow chat, a narcotic plant whose leaves, when chewed, give off a euphoric effect. The film shows a "chat" market from the window of a moving car, making it look as sad and as hopeless as a corner drug deal on some graffiti-smeared street in the U.S.
Despite all this, the filmmakers only present a one-sided story, assuming that corporations are evil without doing the legwork to find out why and how. (They never interview any CEOs.) They sprinkle their film with random, loaded images of rich white people leisurely sipping their cups of coffee, presumably ignorant about where it came from and how little the workers are being paid. We also get a horrifying "tour" of the original Starbucks coffee house in Seattle, conducted by two chirpy young women who express delighted awe at being part of such a powerful empire. (In a leaked memo, a Starbucks VP has since accused the filmmakers of inaccuracy.)
Still, Black Gold is a beautifully made film that takes time to observe the beauties (and horrors) of its world. It prefers the natural rhythm of conversation, complete with pauses, stops and starts. It appears to invite the viewer in rather than demanding that the viewer pay attention. Best of all, this informative film suggests a plan of action: coffee consumers can help by buying only fair trade goods, or by seeking out coffee from Ethiopia (Whole Foods apparently sells it). Thereby we get the benefit of taste, and they get the benefit of a living wage.
Source: Cinematical
Filed under: Documentary, New Releases, Theatrical Reviews
I love coffee. And I'm not talking about your double-half-caff-latte-with-a-twist. I'm talking black coffee, nothing in it. Why drown the taste with sugar and cream? Isn't that like dumping ice cubes in your Pinot Noir? I've been grinding my own beans and brewing my own coffee for years. I know which brands I like, and I try to buy 'Fair Trade' when I can. But ultimately what I really know about coffee could only fill about half a cup.
That's where the new documentary Black Gold, now in limited release, comes in. First-time filmmakers (and brothers) Marc and Nick Francis travel the world over to capture images of coffee plantations, coffee farmers and loving hands carefully caressing piles of unroasted beans. But if this were merely a documentary about the process of bean fields-to-Starbucks, it wouldn't be playing in theaters. No, Black Gold is actually the year's 1000th passive political documentary about how horrible the world is. In Ethiopia, where some of the the finest coffee in the world is harvested, farmers get the equivalent of pennies per sack, whereas, halfway around the world, Westerners pay up to three dollars per cup. Fortunately the film didn't make me feel guilty enough to give up coffee, and it does offer a small, simple response -- if not a solution -- available to nearly anyone in this country.
With Black Gold, the brothers reveal an inquisitive filmic style, exploring and following characters rather than grilling them with interview questions. And, like the best documentaries, they have found a compelling lead character with Tadesse Meskela, who in Ethiopia represents a giant co-op, encompassing 74 farms and over 70,000 farmers. Meskela travels all over, from London to Seattle and New York (where the coffee prices are set) inspecting sacks of beans and meeting with potential buyers. In one heartbreaking scene, he visits a typical supermarket, trying to find at least one bag of coffee that was grown by his farmers. The film presents Meskela as a likable, passionate, highly educated fellow; at home, his wife praises his dedication and complains about his constant absence.
In another subplot, the Francis brothers show how many farmers are giving up coffee growing altogether, simply because they can no longer feed their families on the meager profits. Rather, they are using their land to grow chat, a narcotic plant whose leaves, when chewed, give off a euphoric effect. The film shows a "chat" market from the window of a moving car, making it look as sad and as hopeless as a corner drug deal on some graffiti-smeared street in the U.S.
Despite all this, the filmmakers only present a one-sided story, assuming that corporations are evil without doing the legwork to find out why and how. (They never interview any CEOs.) They sprinkle their film with random, loaded images of rich white people leisurely sipping their cups of coffee, presumably ignorant about where it came from and how little the workers are being paid. We also get a horrifying "tour" of the original Starbucks coffee house in Seattle, conducted by two chirpy young women who express delighted awe at being part of such a powerful empire. (In a leaked memo, a Starbucks VP has since accused the filmmakers of inaccuracy.)
Still, Black Gold is a beautifully made film that takes time to observe the beauties (and horrors) of its world. It prefers the natural rhythm of conversation, complete with pauses, stops and starts. It appears to invite the viewer in rather than demanding that the viewer pay attention. Best of all, this informative film suggests a plan of action: coffee consumers can help by buying only fair trade goods, or by seeking out coffee from Ethiopia (Whole Foods apparently sells it). Thereby we get the benefit of taste, and they get the benefit of a living wage.
Source: Cinematical
What’s in a name? Plenty, Ethiopia tells Starbucks
By Brenda Ryan
Published Nov 9, 2006 8:02 PM
How does the “free trade” pushed by U.S. corporations really work?
Ethiopian coffee farmers don’t make enough in one whole day to buy a latte at Starbucks. But the Ethiopian government has a plan to change that. It’s seeking trademarks on Ethiopia’s famous coffee names in hopes of getting a larger share of their retail price. The charity group Oxfam estimates that the trademarks could bring the Ethiopian coffee industry and farmers an additional $88 million per year.
Starbucks, though, is standing in the way.
Last year the Ethiopian government filed applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to trademark the Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe coffee names. While Ethiopia received a trademark for Yirgacheffe in August, the National Coffee Association and Starbucks are opposing registration of the other two names.
“Coffee shops can sell Sidamo and Harar coffees for up to $26 a pound because of the beans’ specialty status,” Tadesse Meskela, head of the Oromia Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union, said in an Oct. 26 Oxfam press release. “But Ethiopian coffee farmers only earn between 60 cents to $1.10 for their crop, barely enough to cover the cost of production. I think most people would see that as an injustice.”
U.S. corporations are fiercely protective of what they regard as their intellectual property. Patents on AIDS drugs have prevented the people of Africa from obtaining low-cost versions of the medicines. But when it comes to the resources of poor countries, they have a double standard.
Starbucks is calling on Ethiopia to register the coffee names as geographic indicators–names given to indicate the specific place where a food, wine or spirit comes from. The PTO has registered more than 100 geographic indications, including Darjeeling for tea cultivated in Darjeeling, India. Once someone receives a registration, only products produced in that region may carry the geographic name.
Starbucks said in a press release that geographic certification systems “are far more effective than registering trademarks for geographically descriptive terms, which is actually contrary to general trademark law and custom.”
That’s not what Starbucks was saying two years ago when it tried to trademark one of Ethiopia’s coffee names. In 2004 it filed an application to register “Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo” as a trademark. According to PTO’s website, the application was abandoned in July. The Guardian reported Oct. 26 that the PTO had rejected Ethiopia’s application because the word “Sidamo” was already in Starbucks’ application. The article says that once Starbucks’ application became inactive, the National Coffee Association opposed Ethiopia’s application at the request of Starbucks. The NCA and Starbucks both denied that the firm asked the association to intervene.
Light Years IP, a non-profit group that seeks to alleviate poverty by helping producers in developing countries gain ownership of their intellectual property and use it to increase their export income, has been helping the Ethiopian government register trademarks for Harar, Sidamo and Yirgacheffe.
While these gourmet coffees are sold at a premium price at stores like Starbucks, Ethiopia is exporting them at prices close to those of commodity coffee. “Ethiopia receives only around 6 percent of the retail price their fine coffees earn in foreign markets,” Light Years IP says on its Web site. “In comparison, producers of Jamaican Blue Mountain Coffee capture 45 percent of their product’s retail price.”
Light Years IP says Ethiopia has already been granted trademarks in more than 30 countries and plans to license the coffee names to individual companies around the world free of charge. Now that’s a deal you’re not likely to see at Starbucks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article is copyright under a Creative Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
Published Nov 9, 2006 8:02 PM
How does the “free trade” pushed by U.S. corporations really work?
Ethiopian coffee farmers don’t make enough in one whole day to buy a latte at Starbucks. But the Ethiopian government has a plan to change that. It’s seeking trademarks on Ethiopia’s famous coffee names in hopes of getting a larger share of their retail price. The charity group Oxfam estimates that the trademarks could bring the Ethiopian coffee industry and farmers an additional $88 million per year.
Starbucks, though, is standing in the way.
Last year the Ethiopian government filed applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to trademark the Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe coffee names. While Ethiopia received a trademark for Yirgacheffe in August, the National Coffee Association and Starbucks are opposing registration of the other two names.
“Coffee shops can sell Sidamo and Harar coffees for up to $26 a pound because of the beans’ specialty status,” Tadesse Meskela, head of the Oromia Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union, said in an Oct. 26 Oxfam press release. “But Ethiopian coffee farmers only earn between 60 cents to $1.10 for their crop, barely enough to cover the cost of production. I think most people would see that as an injustice.”
U.S. corporations are fiercely protective of what they regard as their intellectual property. Patents on AIDS drugs have prevented the people of Africa from obtaining low-cost versions of the medicines. But when it comes to the resources of poor countries, they have a double standard.
Starbucks is calling on Ethiopia to register the coffee names as geographic indicators–names given to indicate the specific place where a food, wine or spirit comes from. The PTO has registered more than 100 geographic indications, including Darjeeling for tea cultivated in Darjeeling, India. Once someone receives a registration, only products produced in that region may carry the geographic name.
Starbucks said in a press release that geographic certification systems “are far more effective than registering trademarks for geographically descriptive terms, which is actually contrary to general trademark law and custom.”
That’s not what Starbucks was saying two years ago when it tried to trademark one of Ethiopia’s coffee names. In 2004 it filed an application to register “Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo” as a trademark. According to PTO’s website, the application was abandoned in July. The Guardian reported Oct. 26 that the PTO had rejected Ethiopia’s application because the word “Sidamo” was already in Starbucks’ application. The article says that once Starbucks’ application became inactive, the National Coffee Association opposed Ethiopia’s application at the request of Starbucks. The NCA and Starbucks both denied that the firm asked the association to intervene.
Light Years IP, a non-profit group that seeks to alleviate poverty by helping producers in developing countries gain ownership of their intellectual property and use it to increase their export income, has been helping the Ethiopian government register trademarks for Harar, Sidamo and Yirgacheffe.
While these gourmet coffees are sold at a premium price at stores like Starbucks, Ethiopia is exporting them at prices close to those of commodity coffee. “Ethiopia receives only around 6 percent of the retail price their fine coffees earn in foreign markets,” Light Years IP says on its Web site. “In comparison, producers of Jamaican Blue Mountain Coffee capture 45 percent of their product’s retail price.”
Light Years IP says Ethiopia has already been granted trademarks in more than 30 countries and plans to license the coffee names to individual companies around the world free of charge. Now that’s a deal you’re not likely to see at Starbucks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article is copyright under a Creative Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
Oxfam urges Starbucks to stop bullying Ethiopia
Addis Ababa, November 4, 2006 (Addis Ababa) - British-based charity Oxfam International called on US hot drinks giant Starbucks to stop "bullying" the poor in Ethiopia in a row over the trade marking of coffee beans, AFP reported on Friday.
The US-based chain has denied using heavy-handed tactics to foil a bid by Ethiopia to protect the name of three coffee beans and said it wanted to work with the African nation on the issue, it said.
But Oxfam, while welcoming an initial step by Starbucks, called on the company to stop trying to force the government in Addis Ababa to agree to an alternative deal.
"Starbucks has engaged in some positive initial steps in helping coffee farmers living in poverty," said Seth Petchers of Oxfam International's Make Trade Fair campaign.
"I don't understand why they won't take the next step and come to the table and discuss Ethiopia's proposals in good faith."
The report said Starbucks, which extols fair trade with its suppliers in the developing world, has been thrown on the defensive by allegations from Oxfam that it was instrumental in depriving Ethiopian farmers of extra income.
Ethiopia had applied to trademark its most famous coffee names, Sidamo, Harar and Yirgachefie, enabling it to control their use and allow farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price, it said.
But in August the US Patent and Trademark Office ruled in favor of a protest by the National Coffee Association (NCA), which represents US coffee roasters including Starbucks, against the trademark application.
Accusing Starbucks of being behind the NCA protest, Oxfam said the US chain was denying Ethiopian producers an estimated 47 million pounds (70 million euros, 88.5 million dollars) a year.
"Starbucks has refused to move forward in negotiations with Ethiopia unless it's on the company's own terms," said Oxfam, in a statement which urged the company "to stop bullying the poor."
Oxfam is calling on the company "to stop forcing an alternate agreement on Ethiopia and come to the table, open and willing to negotiate," it said.
Source: Ethiopian News Agency
The US-based chain has denied using heavy-handed tactics to foil a bid by Ethiopia to protect the name of three coffee beans and said it wanted to work with the African nation on the issue, it said.
But Oxfam, while welcoming an initial step by Starbucks, called on the company to stop trying to force the government in Addis Ababa to agree to an alternative deal.
"Starbucks has engaged in some positive initial steps in helping coffee farmers living in poverty," said Seth Petchers of Oxfam International's Make Trade Fair campaign.
"I don't understand why they won't take the next step and come to the table and discuss Ethiopia's proposals in good faith."
The report said Starbucks, which extols fair trade with its suppliers in the developing world, has been thrown on the defensive by allegations from Oxfam that it was instrumental in depriving Ethiopian farmers of extra income.
Ethiopia had applied to trademark its most famous coffee names, Sidamo, Harar and Yirgachefie, enabling it to control their use and allow farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price, it said.
But in August the US Patent and Trademark Office ruled in favor of a protest by the National Coffee Association (NCA), which represents US coffee roasters including Starbucks, against the trademark application.
Accusing Starbucks of being behind the NCA protest, Oxfam said the US chain was denying Ethiopian producers an estimated 47 million pounds (70 million euros, 88.5 million dollars) a year.
"Starbucks has refused to move forward in negotiations with Ethiopia unless it's on the company's own terms," said Oxfam, in a statement which urged the company "to stop bullying the poor."
Oxfam is calling on the company "to stop forcing an alternate agreement on Ethiopia and come to the table, open and willing to negotiate," it said.
Source: Ethiopian News Agency
Starbucks in brew-haha with poor farmers (SMH)
Starbucks, the icon of US coffee culture, strongly defended on Sunday its business practices with poor coffee farmers around the world after it was accused of blocking the US trademark application of coffee growers from Ethiopia.
Starbucks said in a full page ad published Sunday in the New York Times that it has worked to strengthen infrastructure of coffee farms in many parts of the world.
"We do these things - in Ethiopia, in Guatemala, in Indonesia, and other coffee growing communities around the globe - not just because it's the right way to work but because it's the smart way to work," the ad said.
Ethiopia, where coffee was first cultivated in the year 850, and British charity Oxfam accused Starbucks last month of stopping the African country from trademarking its coffee, denying farmers potential income of about STG50 million ($A123.6 million).
Oxfam said the US coffee shop, famous around the world for the coffee culture it ignited from its base in Washington state, prevented Ethiopia from securing trademark protection for two of its best-known beans - Sidamo and Harar.
A blocking bid was put in by the US National Coffee Association (NCA), and Oxfam accused Starbucks of being behind the action.
Starbucks, which had turnover of $US7.8 billion ($A10 billion) in the year to October 1, denied the accusation.
Starbucks said it has provided affordable credit to small coffee farmers in the world so they can build bridges, dig wells and build water treatment facilities so they can grow coffee in "a sustainable, profitable, ecologically sound way." No figures were provided by the company in its ad.
If Ethiopia, one of the world's poorest countries, had been successful in trademarking its coffee beans with the US.
Patent and Trademark office, it would have allowed the country to control the use of the beans in the market, giving its farmers more of the retail price.
"Securing the trademark for its Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe coffee beans could have allowed the country to increase its negotiation leverage through control of the names and ultimately (derive) a greater share of the retail price in the global market," Ethiopia's Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
Source: The Sunday Morning Herald
Starbucks said in a full page ad published Sunday in the New York Times that it has worked to strengthen infrastructure of coffee farms in many parts of the world.
"We do these things - in Ethiopia, in Guatemala, in Indonesia, and other coffee growing communities around the globe - not just because it's the right way to work but because it's the smart way to work," the ad said.
Ethiopia, where coffee was first cultivated in the year 850, and British charity Oxfam accused Starbucks last month of stopping the African country from trademarking its coffee, denying farmers potential income of about STG50 million ($A123.6 million).
Oxfam said the US coffee shop, famous around the world for the coffee culture it ignited from its base in Washington state, prevented Ethiopia from securing trademark protection for two of its best-known beans - Sidamo and Harar.
A blocking bid was put in by the US National Coffee Association (NCA), and Oxfam accused Starbucks of being behind the action.
Starbucks, which had turnover of $US7.8 billion ($A10 billion) in the year to October 1, denied the accusation.
Starbucks said it has provided affordable credit to small coffee farmers in the world so they can build bridges, dig wells and build water treatment facilities so they can grow coffee in "a sustainable, profitable, ecologically sound way." No figures were provided by the company in its ad.
If Ethiopia, one of the world's poorest countries, had been successful in trademarking its coffee beans with the US.
Patent and Trademark office, it would have allowed the country to control the use of the beans in the market, giving its farmers more of the retail price.
"Securing the trademark for its Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe coffee beans could have allowed the country to increase its negotiation leverage through control of the names and ultimately (derive) a greater share of the retail price in the global market," Ethiopia's Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
Source: The Sunday Morning Herald
Starbucks urged to sign pact with Ethiopia over coffee names (Seattle PI)
By CRAIG HARRISP-I REPORTER
Oxfam America, a deep-pocketed charity, has turned up the heat on Starbucks by taking out full-page newspaper ads Thursday that urge the Seattle-based coffee giant to sign a licensing agreement with Ethiopia.
The controversy centers upon the Ethiopian names Sidamo, Yirgacheffe and Harar, monikers for high-priced gourmet coffee that Starbucks sells. Boston-based Oxfam America said if Starbucks would sign the agreement an additional $88 million would flow into Ethiopia's coffee industry.
The charity, an international relief organization that said it raised $79 million last year, contends that for every cup of Starbucks coffee sold, just 3 cents goes to coffee farmers in Ethiopia.
"They (farmers) are producing some of the finest coffees in the world and getting next to nothing in return," said Helen DaSilva, Oxfam spokeswoman.
Starbucks issued a statement Thursday saying Oxfam is misleading the public and the charity is not helping Ethiopian coffee farmers.
"We share the goal of benefiting the Ethiopian coffee farmer; however, Oxfam's position deflects focus away from the farmer," Starbucks said. Audrey Lincoff, a Starbucks spokeswoman, said the company has increased its average purchase price of Ethiopian coffees by 50 percent. But she would not disclose what Starbucks pays. The company also would not confirm or dispute Oxfam's 3-cent figure.
Ethiopia is trying to secure the rights to the three coffee names through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The country has succeeded in its attempt to trademark the name Yirgacheffe, but a final decision has not been made on the other two. Holding the trademark would allow growers to charge more.
The National Coffee Association of USA, of which Starbucks is an influential member, has filed protests, arguing the names are generic.
Oxfam recently has been putting pressure on Starbucks, which had $6.4 billion in sales last year, to let the Ethiopian government own those names.
In its statement, Starbucks said signing a trademark agreement might hurt farmers because roasters may stop buying Ethiopian coffees.
DaSilva said Oxfam paid $65,000 for the ads, which ran Thursday in the Seattle P-I, The Seattle Times and The New York Times' West Coast editions.
The ad says: "Starbucks has a team of lawyers to make sure that no one steals its name." Below that line is a picture of a white man in business attire with his feet propped up.
Underneath is a picture of an elderly black man with the words: "The Ethiopian coffee farmer has you."
DaSilva said the ads were placed in Seattle's major papers because the city is an important market to Starbucks.
"It is in their backyard," DaSilva said. "It's a big city with a great coffee culture where people care about coffee. It's important for people to know behind the scenes what is going on."
This report includes information from The Associated Press. P-I reporter Craig Harris can be reached at 206-448-8138 or craigharris@seattlepi.com.
Oxfam America, a deep-pocketed charity, has turned up the heat on Starbucks by taking out full-page newspaper ads Thursday that urge the Seattle-based coffee giant to sign a licensing agreement with Ethiopia.
The controversy centers upon the Ethiopian names Sidamo, Yirgacheffe and Harar, monikers for high-priced gourmet coffee that Starbucks sells. Boston-based Oxfam America said if Starbucks would sign the agreement an additional $88 million would flow into Ethiopia's coffee industry.
The charity, an international relief organization that said it raised $79 million last year, contends that for every cup of Starbucks coffee sold, just 3 cents goes to coffee farmers in Ethiopia.
"They (farmers) are producing some of the finest coffees in the world and getting next to nothing in return," said Helen DaSilva, Oxfam spokeswoman.
Starbucks issued a statement Thursday saying Oxfam is misleading the public and the charity is not helping Ethiopian coffee farmers.
"We share the goal of benefiting the Ethiopian coffee farmer; however, Oxfam's position deflects focus away from the farmer," Starbucks said. Audrey Lincoff, a Starbucks spokeswoman, said the company has increased its average purchase price of Ethiopian coffees by 50 percent. But she would not disclose what Starbucks pays. The company also would not confirm or dispute Oxfam's 3-cent figure.
Ethiopia is trying to secure the rights to the three coffee names through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The country has succeeded in its attempt to trademark the name Yirgacheffe, but a final decision has not been made on the other two. Holding the trademark would allow growers to charge more.
The National Coffee Association of USA, of which Starbucks is an influential member, has filed protests, arguing the names are generic.
Oxfam recently has been putting pressure on Starbucks, which had $6.4 billion in sales last year, to let the Ethiopian government own those names.
In its statement, Starbucks said signing a trademark agreement might hurt farmers because roasters may stop buying Ethiopian coffees.
DaSilva said Oxfam paid $65,000 for the ads, which ran Thursday in the Seattle P-I, The Seattle Times and The New York Times' West Coast editions.
The ad says: "Starbucks has a team of lawyers to make sure that no one steals its name." Below that line is a picture of a white man in business attire with his feet propped up.
Underneath is a picture of an elderly black man with the words: "The Ethiopian coffee farmer has you."
DaSilva said the ads were placed in Seattle's major papers because the city is an important market to Starbucks.
"It is in their backyard," DaSilva said. "It's a big city with a great coffee culture where people care about coffee. It's important for people to know behind the scenes what is going on."
This report includes information from The Associated Press. P-I reporter Craig Harris can be reached at 206-448-8138 or craigharris@seattlepi.com.
Big Bucks for Starbucks - nothing for small farmers
GLOBAL COFFEE chain Starbucks is the McDonalds of the coffee world with hundreds of shops throughout Britain and the world. Its annual revenue is £3.2 billion. This wealthy giant opposes a plan by Ethiopia, one of the world's poorest countries, to gain more control over its coffee trade and a larger share of the earnings for millions of poverty-stricken coffee farmers.
Last year the Ethiopian government applied to trademark its best-known coffee names. That would enable Ethiopia to control their use in the market and help farmers receive a bigger share of the retail price. Ethiopia's coffee industry and farmers could earn around £88 million extra per year.
Starbucks filed protests against these trademark applications with the US Patent and Trademark Office which denied these applications, creating serious obstacles for Ethiopia.
In the global coffee market, profit is king. For every £1 people spend in a Starbucks or other coffee house only 5p gets into the small farmers' hands. A few big multinationals exploit around 25 million small farmers while the terms of trade have fluctuated wildly and in fact got steadily worse since the IMF forcibly deregulated the market in recent decades.
Fear of egg on their smug corporate faces may force Starbucks to act more 'ethically'. However, nothing short of a socialist transformation is going to give the farmers and workers more permanent assistance.
Keith White
Source: Socialist Party
Last year the Ethiopian government applied to trademark its best-known coffee names. That would enable Ethiopia to control their use in the market and help farmers receive a bigger share of the retail price. Ethiopia's coffee industry and farmers could earn around £88 million extra per year.
Starbucks filed protests against these trademark applications with the US Patent and Trademark Office which denied these applications, creating serious obstacles for Ethiopia.
In the global coffee market, profit is king. For every £1 people spend in a Starbucks or other coffee house only 5p gets into the small farmers' hands. A few big multinationals exploit around 25 million small farmers while the terms of trade have fluctuated wildly and in fact got steadily worse since the IMF forcibly deregulated the market in recent decades.
Fear of egg on their smug corporate faces may force Starbucks to act more 'ethically'. However, nothing short of a socialist transformation is going to give the farmers and workers more permanent assistance.
Keith White
Source: Socialist Party
Starbucks Opposes Ethiopia's Plan to Trademark Coffee Names
BOSTON, Oct. 26 /U.S. Newswire/ Global coffee giant Starbucks has opposed a plan by Ethiopia to gain more control over its coffee trade and a larger share of the earnings for millions of coffee farmers living in poverty, international agency Oxfam revealed today.
Last year the Ethiopian government filed applications to trademark its most famous coffee names, Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe. Securing the rights to these names would enable Ethiopia to capture more value from the trade, by controlling their use in the market and thereby enabling farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price. Ethiopia's coffee industry and farmers could earn an estimated $88 million (USD) extra per year.
Six billion-dollar company Starbucks prompted protests against the applications to be filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The USPTO has denied Ethiopia's applications for Sidamo and Harar, creating serious obstacles for its project.
Seth Petchers, Oxfam International's Make Trade Fair campaign coffee lead said: "Starbucks' behavior is indefensible. The company must change tactics and set an example for others by supporting Ethiopia's plan to help millions of struggling farmers earn a greater share of the profits."
"Intellectual property ownership now makes up a huge proportion of the total value of world trade but rich countries and businesses capture most of this. Ethiopia, the birthplace of coffee, and one of the poorest countries in the world, is trying to assert its rights and capture more value from its product. It should be helped, not hindered," said Ron Layton, chief executive of Light Years IP, a Washington D.C.-based intellectual property rights organization that is helping to advise the Ethiopian government. Full story..
Last year the Ethiopian government filed applications to trademark its most famous coffee names, Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe. Securing the rights to these names would enable Ethiopia to capture more value from the trade, by controlling their use in the market and thereby enabling farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price. Ethiopia's coffee industry and farmers could earn an estimated $88 million (USD) extra per year.
Six billion-dollar company Starbucks prompted protests against the applications to be filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The USPTO has denied Ethiopia's applications for Sidamo and Harar, creating serious obstacles for its project.
Seth Petchers, Oxfam International's Make Trade Fair campaign coffee lead said: "Starbucks' behavior is indefensible. The company must change tactics and set an example for others by supporting Ethiopia's plan to help millions of struggling farmers earn a greater share of the profits."
"Intellectual property ownership now makes up a huge proportion of the total value of world trade but rich countries and businesses capture most of this. Ethiopia, the birthplace of coffee, and one of the poorest countries in the world, is trying to assert its rights and capture more value from its product. It should be helped, not hindered," said Ron Layton, chief executive of Light Years IP, a Washington D.C.-based intellectual property rights organization that is helping to advise the Ethiopian government. Full story..
Starbucks Costing Coffee Farmers Millions, Oxfam Claims (New Zeeland Herald)
Global coffee giant Starbucks is denying Ethiopian coffee-farmers of $132 million a year by refusing them ownership of their coffee brands, international agency Oxfam says.
The Ethiopian government filed applications to trademark its famous coffee names Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe in the US, Canada, Japan and European Union countries.
But while coffee bodies in the other countries have given Ethiopia ownership of its brands, it is claimed Starbucks opposed it through the US National Coffee Association, of which it is a leading member.
The US Patent and Trademark Office subsequently denied the trademark applications.
If it had been approved, it would have placed about $132 million a year in the hands of coffee-farmers, rather than into the pockets of Starbucks, Oxfam says.
"Starbucks' behaviour is indefensible," said Seth Petchers, head of Oxfam International's Make Trade Fair campaign.
"Starbucks works to protect and promote its own name and brand vigorously throughout the world, so how can it justify denying Ethiopia the right to do the same?"
Starbucks, whose annual turnover is equivalent to about three quarters of Ethiopia's entire gross domestic product, said in a statement it had offered to help the Ethiopian Government in developing a certification program.
Starbucks had never filed an opposition to the trademark application, the statement said.
But Ron Layton, head of US intellectual property rights organisation Light Years, which is advising the Ethiopian government, said Starbucks filed a trademark application with the word "Sidamo" in 2004 to the trademarks office.
Ethiopia's application a year later was rejected because the word was already part of a Starbucks' application, it is claimed. When Starbucks' application lapsed in June, the US National Coffee Association objected to the Ethiopian application.
Tadesse Meskela, head of the Oromia Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union in Ethiopia, said Sidamo and Harar coffees sell for up to $86 a kilogram in the US.
"But Ethiopian coffee farmers only earn between US60c (NZ 91c) to US$1.10 (NZ$1.67) for their crop, barely enough to cover the cost of production. I think most people would see that as an injustice."
Oxfam NZ fair trade spokeswoman Linda Broom said Starbucks turned a blind eye to the Ethiopian Government's request last month to sign an agreement, which would have recognised ownership rights and ensured the benefits went to the country's coffee-farmers. Starbucks was acting immorally, but not illegally, Ms Broom said.
"We've been lobbying from behind the scenes, but Starbucks has turned a blind eye, so now we're hoping for a public backlash."
Starbucks stated it was committed to paying premium prices to producers in more than 27 countries, and its purchases of Ethiopian coffee had grown by more than 400 per cent in the past four years.
Ms Broom said Ethiopian authorities were still working towards applying for trademark in New Zealand, where its coffee makes up the biggest proportion of the $4 million in fair-trade coffee sales in the last financial year.
Source: New Zeeland Herald
Note: change of font color was done by Ethiopian Coffee to highlight those points.
The Ethiopian government filed applications to trademark its famous coffee names Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe in the US, Canada, Japan and European Union countries.
But while coffee bodies in the other countries have given Ethiopia ownership of its brands, it is claimed Starbucks opposed it through the US National Coffee Association, of which it is a leading member.
The US Patent and Trademark Office subsequently denied the trademark applications.
If it had been approved, it would have placed about $132 million a year in the hands of coffee-farmers, rather than into the pockets of Starbucks, Oxfam says.
"Starbucks' behaviour is indefensible," said Seth Petchers, head of Oxfam International's Make Trade Fair campaign.
"Starbucks works to protect and promote its own name and brand vigorously throughout the world, so how can it justify denying Ethiopia the right to do the same?"
Starbucks, whose annual turnover is equivalent to about three quarters of Ethiopia's entire gross domestic product, said in a statement it had offered to help the Ethiopian Government in developing a certification program.
Starbucks had never filed an opposition to the trademark application, the statement said.
But Ron Layton, head of US intellectual property rights organisation Light Years, which is advising the Ethiopian government, said Starbucks filed a trademark application with the word "Sidamo" in 2004 to the trademarks office.
Ethiopia's application a year later was rejected because the word was already part of a Starbucks' application, it is claimed. When Starbucks' application lapsed in June, the US National Coffee Association objected to the Ethiopian application.
Tadesse Meskela, head of the Oromia Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union in Ethiopia, said Sidamo and Harar coffees sell for up to $86 a kilogram in the US.
"But Ethiopian coffee farmers only earn between US60c (NZ 91c) to US$1.10 (NZ$1.67) for their crop, barely enough to cover the cost of production. I think most people would see that as an injustice."
Oxfam NZ fair trade spokeswoman Linda Broom said Starbucks turned a blind eye to the Ethiopian Government's request last month to sign an agreement, which would have recognised ownership rights and ensured the benefits went to the country's coffee-farmers. Starbucks was acting immorally, but not illegally, Ms Broom said.
"We've been lobbying from behind the scenes, but Starbucks has turned a blind eye, so now we're hoping for a public backlash."
Starbucks stated it was committed to paying premium prices to producers in more than 27 countries, and its purchases of Ethiopian coffee had grown by more than 400 per cent in the past four years.
Ms Broom said Ethiopian authorities were still working towards applying for trademark in New Zealand, where its coffee makes up the biggest proportion of the $4 million in fair-trade coffee sales in the last financial year.
Source: New Zeeland Herald
Note: change of font color was done by Ethiopian Coffee to highlight those points.
Ethiopia calls upon Starbucks to support trade marks (AND)
Ethiopia urges Starbucks and other coffee companies to support the country’s plan to trademark speciality coffee names, a process that could bring Ethiopian farmers an estimated $88m annually.
Ethiopia calls upon Starbucks to fully support its plan to trademark coffee names
Ethiopia urges Starbucks to support the country’s plan to trademark speciality coffee names, a process that could bring Ethiopian farmers an estimated $88m annually.
The Ethiopian government believes that companies like Starbucks are morally bound to support Ethiopia’s efforts to gain more control over its coffee trade and a larger share of the earnings for millions of coffee farmers living in poverty.
Last year the Ethiopian government filed applications to trademark its most famous coffee names, Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe. Securing the rights to these names would enable Ethiopia to capture more value from the trade, by controlling their use in the market and thereby enabling farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price.
Ethiopia was surprised to see Starbucks – which is worth $6bn - launching a protest against Ethiopia’s application to the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The USPTO has since denied Ethiopia’s applications for Sidamo and Harar, creating serious obstacles to its efforts to get a fair price for these coffees.
Berhanu Kebede, Ethiopia’s Ambassador to the UK, added “Ethiopian coffee is a prime product whose producers should earn a fair price for their hard work. It is also encumbent upon the international community to support this novel endeavour, which aims to fully empower coffee farmers in Ethiopia. This campaign has a pivotal role in redressing the unfairness of the international trading system.”
In reaction to the unacceptable position taken by Starbucks, Seth Petchers of Oxfam International’s Make Trade Fair campaign said:
“Starbucks’ behaviour is indefensible. The company must change tactics and set an example for others by supporting Ethiopia’s plan to help millions of struggling farmers earn a greater share of the profits.”
“Intellectual property ownership now makes up a huge proportion of the total value of world trade but rich countries and businesses capture most of this. Ethiopia, the birthplace of coffee, and one of the poorest countries in the world, is trying to assert its rights and capture more value from its product. It should be helped, not hindered,” said Ron Layton, chief executive of Light Years IP, a Washington DC-based intellectual property rights organisation that is helping to advise the Ethiopian government.
If Ethiopia successfully trademarks the names of its speciality coffees, farmers could earn more from them, making a vast difference in the lives of some of the poorest people in the world. Once Jamaica’s “Blue Mountain” coffee received a trademark it fetched almost ten times what it used to fetch. In contrast, the few extra cents per pound would hardly make a dent in the profits of multi-national companies like Starbucks which earned over $3.7 billion last year.
Tadesse Meskela, head of the Oromia Coffee Farmers’ Cooperative Union in Ethiopia remarked: "Coffee shops can sell Sidamo and Harar coffees for up to $26 a pound because of the beans’ speciality status, but Ethiopian coffee farmers only earn between 60 cents to $1.10 for their crop, barely enough to cover the cost of production. I think most people would see that as an injustice."
The embassy was surprised to learn about Starbucks’ recent intervention in the USPTO decision - through prompting the National Coffee Association of USA, Inc. (NCA), of which it is a leading member, to oppose the approval of the trademarks.
Starbucks brought the application to the attention of the NCA a year after Ethiopia’s trademark application was submitted. Ethiopia is nevertheless continuing to pursue its trademark applications in the US. At the same time, it is asking Starbucks and other companies to sign voluntary licensing agreements that immediately acknowledge the country’s ownership of the coffee names, regardless of whether they have been issued a trademark. The licensing agreements will allow Ethiopia to pursue its strategy of enhancing its trading capacity and earning an estimated additional $88 million per year for its coffee sector, including millions of poor coffee farmers.
To this end, the Ethiopian government presented an agreement for Starbucks to sign in September, recognising the country’s rights to the names Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe and stating that additional benefits generated would go to small-scale coffee farmers who are currently living on the brink of survival. However, Starbucks has yet to respond affirmatively.
The plan to trademark Ethiopian speciality coffee names is being developed and run by the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office (EIPO).
Ethiopia calls upon Starbucks to fully support its plan to trademark coffee names
Ethiopia urges Starbucks to support the country’s plan to trademark speciality coffee names, a process that could bring Ethiopian farmers an estimated $88m annually.
The Ethiopian government believes that companies like Starbucks are morally bound to support Ethiopia’s efforts to gain more control over its coffee trade and a larger share of the earnings for millions of coffee farmers living in poverty.
Last year the Ethiopian government filed applications to trademark its most famous coffee names, Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe. Securing the rights to these names would enable Ethiopia to capture more value from the trade, by controlling their use in the market and thereby enabling farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price.
Ethiopia was surprised to see Starbucks – which is worth $6bn - launching a protest against Ethiopia’s application to the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The USPTO has since denied Ethiopia’s applications for Sidamo and Harar, creating serious obstacles to its efforts to get a fair price for these coffees.
Berhanu Kebede, Ethiopia’s Ambassador to the UK, added “Ethiopian coffee is a prime product whose producers should earn a fair price for their hard work. It is also encumbent upon the international community to support this novel endeavour, which aims to fully empower coffee farmers in Ethiopia. This campaign has a pivotal role in redressing the unfairness of the international trading system.”
In reaction to the unacceptable position taken by Starbucks, Seth Petchers of Oxfam International’s Make Trade Fair campaign said:
“Starbucks’ behaviour is indefensible. The company must change tactics and set an example for others by supporting Ethiopia’s plan to help millions of struggling farmers earn a greater share of the profits.”
“Intellectual property ownership now makes up a huge proportion of the total value of world trade but rich countries and businesses capture most of this. Ethiopia, the birthplace of coffee, and one of the poorest countries in the world, is trying to assert its rights and capture more value from its product. It should be helped, not hindered,” said Ron Layton, chief executive of Light Years IP, a Washington DC-based intellectual property rights organisation that is helping to advise the Ethiopian government.
If Ethiopia successfully trademarks the names of its speciality coffees, farmers could earn more from them, making a vast difference in the lives of some of the poorest people in the world. Once Jamaica’s “Blue Mountain” coffee received a trademark it fetched almost ten times what it used to fetch. In contrast, the few extra cents per pound would hardly make a dent in the profits of multi-national companies like Starbucks which earned over $3.7 billion last year.
Tadesse Meskela, head of the Oromia Coffee Farmers’ Cooperative Union in Ethiopia remarked: "Coffee shops can sell Sidamo and Harar coffees for up to $26 a pound because of the beans’ speciality status, but Ethiopian coffee farmers only earn between 60 cents to $1.10 for their crop, barely enough to cover the cost of production. I think most people would see that as an injustice."
The embassy was surprised to learn about Starbucks’ recent intervention in the USPTO decision - through prompting the National Coffee Association of USA, Inc. (NCA), of which it is a leading member, to oppose the approval of the trademarks.
Starbucks brought the application to the attention of the NCA a year after Ethiopia’s trademark application was submitted. Ethiopia is nevertheless continuing to pursue its trademark applications in the US. At the same time, it is asking Starbucks and other companies to sign voluntary licensing agreements that immediately acknowledge the country’s ownership of the coffee names, regardless of whether they have been issued a trademark. The licensing agreements will allow Ethiopia to pursue its strategy of enhancing its trading capacity and earning an estimated additional $88 million per year for its coffee sector, including millions of poor coffee farmers.
To this end, the Ethiopian government presented an agreement for Starbucks to sign in September, recognising the country’s rights to the names Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe and stating that additional benefits generated would go to small-scale coffee farmers who are currently living on the brink of survival. However, Starbucks has yet to respond affirmatively.
The plan to trademark Ethiopian speciality coffee names is being developed and run by the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office (EIPO).
Source: African News Dimension
Starbucks and Ethiopian Government in coffee row (ClickAfrique)
Starbucks the Seattle based Coffee giant has run into a storm of controversy over allegations by Oxfam that Starbucks had objected to moves by Ethiopia to trademark some of its more famous coffee names as brands.
Oxfam claims that Starbuck has asked the American National Coffee Association (NCA) to block Ethiopia's recent attempt to trademark brands such as Harar, Sidamo, Yirgacheffe.
The Ethiopian government had filed an application in the US to trademark these names which are names of regions of Ethiopia where the coffee is grown. Analysts believe that the move could substantially boost the earnings Ethiopia makes form coffee exports by about $88 million a year.
The NCA claim that the hurt the Ethiopian coffee market not aid it, and by extension any problems for Ethiopian growers will hurt the American coffee industry.
Starbucks which uses these names on a number of products it sells has countered these allegations by denying they opposed the application. They stressed that they had offered to work with the Ethiopian government to set up a certification scheme which they believe would be more effective.
The plan to trademark Ethiopian specialty coffee names is being developed and run by the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) and undertaken with some grant funding from the UK's Department for International Development.
Under the same EIPO project, Harar, Yirgacheffe and Sidamo are being trademarked in other coffee consuming countries including Canada, Japan and the EU.
Source: Click Afrique
Oxfam claims that Starbuck has asked the American National Coffee Association (NCA) to block Ethiopia's recent attempt to trademark brands such as Harar, Sidamo, Yirgacheffe.
The Ethiopian government had filed an application in the US to trademark these names which are names of regions of Ethiopia where the coffee is grown. Analysts believe that the move could substantially boost the earnings Ethiopia makes form coffee exports by about $88 million a year.
The NCA claim that the hurt the Ethiopian coffee market not aid it, and by extension any problems for Ethiopian growers will hurt the American coffee industry.
Starbucks which uses these names on a number of products it sells has countered these allegations by denying they opposed the application. They stressed that they had offered to work with the Ethiopian government to set up a certification scheme which they believe would be more effective.
The plan to trademark Ethiopian specialty coffee names is being developed and run by the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) and undertaken with some grant funding from the UK's Department for International Development.
Under the same EIPO project, Harar, Yirgacheffe and Sidamo are being trademarked in other coffee consuming countries including Canada, Japan and the EU.
Source: Click Afrique
Oxfam Taking On Starbucks to Secure Ethiopian Coffee Farmer Rights (IWW)
Oxfam revealed today that Starbucks has been working to block Ethiopian coffee farmers from asserting the right to their own cultural heritage. Ethiopia is seeking to control its own coffee names- Sidamo, Harar, and Yirgacheffe- against Starbucks' opposition. The company's maneuvering is depriving Ethiopian coffee farmers of tens of millions of dollars a year in much needed revenue.
The revelation is further evidence that Starbucks' socially-responsible claims regarding coffee farmers and baristas is nothing but spin.
Visit the Starbucks campaign homepage at Oxfam's website: here
Take a stand with workers across the Starbucks supply chain with the Justice from Bean to Cup! campaign: http://starbucksunion.org/bean2cup
Source: Industrial Workers of the World
The revelation is further evidence that Starbucks' socially-responsible claims regarding coffee farmers and baristas is nothing but spin.
Visit the Starbucks campaign homepage at Oxfam's website: here
Take a stand with workers across the Starbucks supply chain with the Justice from Bean to Cup! campaign: http://starbucksunion.org/bean2cup
Source: Industrial Workers of the World
"THERE'S a story behind every cup of coffee you drink, and it's often one that would leave a bitter taste in your mouth if you knew about it. A case in point is the story that appeared this week revealing that Starbucks is opposing Ethiopian plans to trademark its most famous coffee names.
There's a real opportunity here for Ethiopia to capitalise - quite rightly - on the consistently high quality of its coffees by being able to trademark their coffee names and control how those names are used by others. If Starbucks can vigorously protect and make best use of its own globally recognised brand name, while at the same time making a big noise about selling the finest Ethiopian coffees, isn't there a whiff of hypocrisy in the air? " as written by Western Mail.
Is this not absolutely shameful to deny poorest farmers in Ethiopia to get value for their coffee by registering the names of their coffee?
There's a real opportunity here for Ethiopia to capitalise - quite rightly - on the consistently high quality of its coffees by being able to trademark their coffee names and control how those names are used by others. If Starbucks can vigorously protect and make best use of its own globally recognised brand name, while at the same time making a big noise about selling the finest Ethiopian coffees, isn't there a whiff of hypocrisy in the air? " as written by Western Mail.
Is this not absolutely shameful to deny poorest farmers in Ethiopia to get value for their coffee by registering the names of their coffee?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)