>

What does it have to do with american IP law? It's not unusual that a country has its own laws that protect trademarks, including for foreign businesses that set up shop there.
Whether you think these laws should exist at all is of course a different matter, but that's off-topic. For as long as they do exist, foreign businesses setting up shops should get the same level of protection from trademark infringement as local businesses do. That's how most countries do it.
So you can get better coffee at a pirate den than a Starbucks. >

Welcome to my coffee shop/pirate ship >

I’ll have a red eye.
gets an eye patch >

"no, no, a red eye."
gets shot for questioning the captain during piratical activities >

Updoot for piratical >

Nathan Fielder up to his antics again? >

I bet the coffee is fire though. >

They got some bitchin coffee. >

Love how lobbyists have turned ~~copyright~~ trademark infringement into “piracy”. >

You wouldn't download a coffee? >

I saw something about the possibility of printing cars as the technology grows. It reminded me of the old theater ad that said "You wouldn't download a car, would you?"
Uh if it saved me from the bullshit doc fee, dealer markup, and all the emerging subscription based upgrades, yeah, I would. >

I wonder how the meeting to decide music went.
Guys we need some music for our anti piracy commercial.
I got you, I know this song that'll be perfect.
Cool get the licensing worked out and we'll use it.
Licensing? Nah. >

Finally, a Starbucks that doesn't support Apartheid. >

how does someone write this article defending starbucks? oh no, I feel terrible for the mega corporation that sells gross coffee and doesn't allow employees to organize! and the best part is this guy is doing it all with genuine starbucks products he buys, so he is just increasing sales for them.
also notable lol from the article - sbux didn't back down when this guy threatened terrorism, but dropped the case when he contacted a lawyer >

Iraq =/= Iran >

D’oh.  yes, I screwed that one up nice and bad. Thanks for the catch! >

As part of the Iranian diaspora, maybe it would be advised to delete your previous comment. Like you now realize Iran is not Iraq; however, your point doesn’t really stand, especially since the Iranian people aren’t the regime. And that line of thinking is pretty Western and really reductive. Again, I say this because Iranian people aren’t the regime. So it’s not really about Starbucks protecting its brand because of optics. It’s about Starbucks trying not to dilute its brand in anyway. >

Fair enough. >

So Dumb Starbucks is expanding to Iraq I see >

Good for him, fuck Starbucks and their billions in lost revenue. >

Green Beans living on in spirit. >

The idea that American ip law should apply to Iraq is lunacy