[image from abc. Here’s a primer on this issue]
What’s NOT under dispute: Clearly, Starbucks CEO Jim Donald and his team met with Ethiopian officials about the Ethiopian coffee trademarking issue late November
What IS under dispute: The results of that meeting.
If you read the Starbucks’ press release, you’d think the meeting was all ’bout agreements. Starbucks CEO Jim Donald’s quoted saying: “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.” The release points to “positive meetings” that serve “as the first step in developing a solution.”
But pretty much no one else says what Starbucks sez.
Oxfam sez: “Despite its much-publicized commitment to farming communities, however, Starbucks has continually rejected Ethiopia’s requests to resolve the trademark issue. Absent that step, no agreement was reached at Tuesday’s meeting.”
One World US quotes intellectual property lawyer and Ethiopian government adviser Ron Layton, Seth Petchers of Oxfam, and exec director of Food First Eric Holt-Gimenez saying no progress was made. The article also notes that Starbucks refused to be interviewed for this story.
Reuters: “Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and the chief executive of Starbucks, the U.S. coffee shop chain, failed to settle a trademark dispute during talks in Addis Ababa, Ethiopian officials said on Wednesday.”
The headline for BBC’s take: “Ethiopia and Starbucks talks fail”
We’ve got Starbucks’ press releases against everyone else. Who do you believe?
December 15th, 2006 at 12:12 am
I guess Starbuck’s is another company whose products I will not require in the future. I have two very close friends from Ethiopia so I have a pretty good insight into the situation on the ground. They would like to thank you, by the way, for what you are doing. This is neo-colonialism at its very worst.
December 15th, 2006 at 1:43 am
compare starbucks annual turnover to Ethiopias GNP