If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Los Angeles 2)   L.A., the town that's seen everything, is dumbstruck by the sudden appearance of "Dumb Starbucks" coffeehouse: "This has to be a reality show. And I see a camera in the espresso machine"   (losangeles.cbslocal.com) divider line 70
    More: Amusing, Los Feliz, espresso machine, Starbucks, Los Angeles, college town, Rainn Wilson, cameras  
•       •       •

12926 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Feb 2014 at 10:21 AM (22 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



70 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-09 10:24:52 AM
Wait, there is any another type of Starbucks?
 
2014-02-09 10:25:39 AM
areyounotentertained.jpg

Meh. Not really.
 
2014-02-09 10:27:05 AM
I'm all for fair use but this seems like it's abusing the concept a little.
 
2014-02-09 10:28:14 AM
Fajardo says this is not the place for that. While they call themselves a legit coffeehouse, rumors on the web call it performance art, a TV show, an art gallery.

Another patron sipped their latte and told Fajardo, "This is pretty awful."


So, also like Starbucks.
 
2014-02-09 10:30:44 AM
They're gonna get sued so hard.
 
2014-02-09 10:30:58 AM
"Only in L.A.!  Ha Ha Ha!"

Who the fark cares?
 
2014-02-09 10:37:14 AM
Who would actually spend money creating this?
 
2014-02-09 10:38:23 AM
Seems like an awful lot of trouble to go to for a bit of mild amusement.
Next time just belch the alphabet and be done with it.
 
2014-02-09 10:38:35 AM

wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.


That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.
 
2014-02-09 10:38:35 AM
I'm not sure why I feel this way, but I think this may be the greatest thing ever.
 
2014-02-09 10:39:49 AM
So a venti coffee there will be 20 ounces instead of 24?
 
2014-02-09 10:42:59 AM

Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.


Pretty sure parody doesn't work like that...
 
2014-02-09 10:44:39 AM
Jeez, I know this precise location. I met a girl with absolutely huge boobs, medium everything else, a short dress, a nice face and an awesome personality in the Drawing Room in that same strip center on Hillhurst back in 2008 - and I sure got my four drinks' worth. Good night Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are.

/csb
 
2014-02-09 10:46:48 AM
I wonder if this will pay off?  Short term rent a space, open this up as cheap as possible, get some publicity going which draws in crowds, keep open until Starbucks officially sues.
 
2014-02-09 10:48:01 AM
But... Isn't Starbucks already dumb? This is just redundant.
 
2014-02-09 10:48:51 AM
Nice, Idiocracy has taken hold.

I wonder if they use water, like from the toilet?
 
2014-02-09 10:52:41 AM

Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.


The article hinted that they weren't charging for their coffee. If so, the parody argument probably would apply quite well.

Can anybody confirm that?
 
2014-02-09 10:53:19 AM

Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.


The commercial use of the name for a coffee shop undermines the fair use defense. I hope he has fun, because Starbucks' lawyers are about to take a shiat on his head.
 
2014-02-09 10:55:22 AM

Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.


http://www.lfiplaw.com/articles/trademark_parody.htm is the first google result I got on the subject. tl;dr: Parody is not an excuse for creating confusion, so you can parody if you're good enough to avoid confusion. I think this fails.
 
2014-02-09 10:58:34 AM
Free Starbucks coffee?

http://jonathanstark.com/card/

Already been done, already been done farked. It's amazing how something so nice and decent as free coffee on a Starbucks card could be farked so easily by some scumbag who thought by farking it up some sweet young thing would show up at his front door and yank on his yambag.
 
2014-02-09 11:01:51 AM
My name is Gordon Bennett and I am posting this before you.

paranorm.spithate.com


/go on, shake your tiny fist
 
2014-02-09 11:11:55 AM

Voiceofreason01: I'm all for fair use but this seems like it's abusing the concept a little.


3.bp.blogspot.com

/Not sure is serious.
 
2014-02-09 11:13:39 AM

Gordon Bennett: My name is Gordon Bennett and I am posting this before you.

[paranorm.spithate.com image 629x342]


/go on, shake your tiny fist


Oh I'm shaking something alright.

/But it isn't tiny.
//Not huge either.
 
2014-02-09 11:18:42 AM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.

Pretty sure parody doesn't work like that...


What parody might work like:
yafh.com
 
2014-02-09 11:20:40 AM

Nabb1: Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.

The commercial use of the name for a coffee shop undermines the fair use defense. I hope he has fun, because Starbucks' lawyers are about to take a shiat on his head.


But if they're giving away coffee as TFA indicates, that makes it look a whole lot more like some kind of performance art weirdness, and certainly makes the fair use defense a whole lot more plausible.
 
2014-02-09 11:21:04 AM

Gordon Bennett: My name is Gordon Bennett and I am posting this before you.

[paranorm.spithate.com image 629x342]


/go on, shake your tiny fist


Weird...  I know somebody with that name.
 
2014-02-09 11:21:49 AM

Gordon Bennett: My name is Gordon Bennett and I am posting this before you.

[paranorm.spithate.com image 629x342]


/go on, shake your tiny fist


Meh, I'm posting THIS before you.
ic.pics.livejournal.com

Now THAT's... parody.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-02-09 11:22:09 AM

Gordon Bennett: My name is Gordon Bennett and I am posting this before you.

[paranorm.spithate.com image 629x342]


/go on, shake your tiny fist


encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
 
2014-02-09 11:23:55 AM
If it's parody, it's along the same creatively handicapped lines as the "_____ Movie" franchise. The whole joke is putting the word "dumb" in front of the name and handing out terrible coffee? Is there some meta parody of parody itself going on here, where the real joke is convincing people there's funny where no funny exists?

The perpetrators better watch out. If they keep dividing by comedy zero, they'll end up with Dane Cook and Andy Dick as regular patrons.
 
2014-02-09 11:32:01 AM

Gordon Bennett: My name is Gordon Bennett and I am posting this before you.

[paranorm.spithate.com image 629x342]


/go on, shake your tiny fist


In the late '80s, when my friend and I took the Q11 to Queens Center, we wondered how McDowell's could ever get away with that. It made no sense. Then, the movie came out.

/CSS
 
2014-02-09 11:32:36 AM

Stephen_Falken: Jeez, I know this precise location. I met a girl with absolutely huge boobs, medium everything else, a short dress, a nice face and an awesome personality in the Drawing Room in that same strip center on Hillhurst back in 2008 - and I sure got my four drinks' worth. Good night Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are.

/csb


Pics or gtfo
 
2014-02-09 11:34:47 AM

ransack.: Who would actually spend money creating this?


Banksy. This REALLY sounds like the work of Banksy. Dude has enough money now that he can and does do shiat like this from time to time.
 
2014-02-09 11:34:51 AM

EdgeRunner: If it's parody, it's along the same creatively handicapped lines as the "_____ Movie" franchise. The whole joke is putting the word "dumb" in front of the name and handing out terrible coffee? Is there some meta parody of parody itself going on here, where the real joke is convincing people there's funny where no funny exists?

The perpetrators better watch out. If they keep dividing by comedy zero, they'll end up with Dane Cook and Andy Dick as regular patrons.


Well, they've already got Rainn Wilson.
 
x23
2014-02-09 11:36:38 AM
this sounds like something for "Nathan For You".

the new season probably would be filming now as well.
 
2014-02-09 11:47:14 AM
Where can I get a "dumb starbucks" t shirt or a "starf**cks" t shirt... they got to exist!!
 
2014-02-09 11:50:27 AM

propasaurus: EdgeRunner: If it's parody, it's along the same creatively handicapped lines as the "_____ Movie" franchise. The whole joke is putting the word "dumb" in front of the name and handing out terrible coffee? Is there some meta parody of parody itself going on here, where the real joke is convincing people there's funny where no funny exists?

The perpetrators better watch out. If they keep dividing by comedy zero, they'll end up with Dane Cook and Andy Dick as regular patrons.

Well, they've already got Rainn Wilson.


Zing!
 
2014-02-09 11:56:40 AM

Greek: ransack.: Who would actually spend money creating this?

Banksy. This REALLY sounds like the work of Banksy. Dude has enough money now that he can and does do shiat like this from time to time.


I would hope someone who's supposedly a professional artist would come up with something a little more clever.
 
2014-02-09 12:06:55 PM

Need_MindBleach: Greek: ransack.: Who would actually spend money creating this?

Banksy. This REALLY sounds like the work of Banksy. Dude has enough money now that he can and does do shiat like this from time to time.

I would hope someone who's supposedly a professional artist would come up with something a little more clever.


Justin Beiber is a "professional artist."  Just sayin.
 
2014-02-09 12:08:13 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: Free Starbucks coffee?

http://jonathanstark.com/card/

Already been done, already been done farked. It's amazing how something so nice and decent as free coffee on a Starbucks card could be farked so easily by some scumbag who thought by farking it up some sweet young thing would show up at his front door and yank on his yambag.


If the yambag yank is of the monkey-steals-peach variety, I think I could be ok with that.
 
2014-02-09 12:53:20 PM

EdgeRunner: If it's parody, it's along the same creatively handicapped lines as the "_____ Movie" franchise. The whole joke is putting the word "dumb" in front of the name and handing out terrible coffee? Is there some meta parody of parody itself going on here, where the real joke is convincing people there's funny where no funny exists?

The perpetrators better watch out. If they keep dividing by comedy zero, they'll end up with Dane Cook and Andy Dick as regular patrons.


I think the joke is getting people to line up for hours to get what they know is horrible coffee.

Or they are just trolling Starbucks with the fair use argument.
 
2014-02-09 01:02:16 PM

Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.


A business cannot be a parody. Somewhere in case history this has to have been covered.
 
2014-02-09 01:17:11 PM

Nabb1: Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.

The commercial use of the name for a coffee shop undermines the fair use defense. I hope he has fun, because Starbucks' lawyers are about to take a shiat on his head.


It's not a coffee shop. They don't sell coffee.
 
2014-02-09 01:18:58 PM

wildcardjack: Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.

A business cannot be a parody. Somewhere in case history this has to have been covered.


Yeah?  Then how do you explain Comcast?
 
2014-02-09 01:26:28 PM

EdgeRunner: If it's parody, it's along the same creatively handicapped lines as the "_____ Movie" franchise. The whole joke is putting the word "dumb" in front of the name and handing out terrible coffee? Is there some meta parody of parody itself going on here, where the real joke is convincing people there's funny where no funny exists?

The perpetrators better watch out. If they keep dividing by comedy zero, they'll end up with Dane Cook and Andy Dick as regular patrons.


Dude, Not Another Teen Movie was actually pretty good. I'll agree with you about every single other movie ever associated with any of the people that wrote produced or directed any of those stupid movies. But Not Another Teen Movie was funny. I still watch it if I happen to notice it on Comedy Central.
 
2014-02-09 01:27:11 PM
i60.tinypic.com
That's 37 dollars.

Awesome!
 
2014-02-09 01:45:31 PM
Yeah, I'm gonna go with "Starbucks publicity stunt".

/Either that or some ridiculously rich person is snickering at his $20,000 joke
 
2014-02-09 01:47:45 PM

CipollinaFan: Or they are just trolling Starbucks with the fair use argument.


"Fair use" is an affirmative defense to copyright infringement claims. There's no such concept applicable to trademark law.
 
2014-02-09 01:56:09 PM

spawn73: Nabb1: Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.

The commercial use of the name for a coffee shop undermines the fair use defense. I hope he has fun, because Starbucks' lawyers are about to take a shiat on his head.

It's not a coffee shop. They don't sell coffee.


AFAIK, even parody can't directly use copyrighted or trademarked material without permission, which is why you usually get Mad Magazine-esque wordplay like Starschmucks or BigBucks or so forth. I don't think you can flat out lift the name and just lazily throw an adjective in front of it, even if you're not profiting from your pointless art piece or whatever this is. Starbucks could reasonably argue that by using their actual corporate name, people could be confused into thinking they approved of this phony storefront.
 
2014-02-09 02:03:16 PM
This is probably an official Starbucks media campaign.
 
2014-02-09 02:09:47 PM

EdgeRunner: spawn73: Nabb1: Blathering Idjut: wantingout: They're gonna get sued so hard.

That was my first thought, but the parody argument is pretty interesting.

The commercial use of the name for a coffee shop undermines the fair use defense. I hope he has fun, because Starbucks' lawyers are about to take a shiat on his head.

It's not a coffee shop. They don't sell coffee.

AFAIK, even parody can't directly use copyrighted or trademarked material without permission, which is why you usually get Mad Magazine-esque wordplay like Starschmucks or BigBucks or so forth. I don't think you can flat out lift the name and just lazily throw an adjective in front of it, even if you're not profiting from your pointless art piece or whatever this is. Starbucks could reasonably argue that by using their actual corporate name, people could be confused into thinking they approved of this phony storefront.


Then how come KitKat is made by Hershey in North America but Nestlé everywhere else in the world?
 
Displayed 50 of 70 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report