Starbucks Prevailed in Opposition Proceeding Against “R/R” Trademark

 On January 22, 2026, Starbucks Corporation (“Starbucks”) successfully secured the cancellation of a trademark featuring “R/R”, convincing Taiwan’s IP Office (“TIPO”) that such trademark is confusingly similar to its iconic “Starbucks Reserve Star & R” logos (Reg. No. 01578229, 01902958, and 01458517, see below).

The contested trademark, “R/R” (Reg. No. 02437016, see below), was filed on March 18, 2024, and granted on February 16, 2025, designated for use in services in Class 43, including beverage shops, restaurants, tea houses, coffee shops, beer shops, bars, buffet restaurants, banquet catering services, etc. Starbucks filed an opposition on May 16, 2025, alleging that such registration violated Articles 30.1.10, 30.1.11, and 30.1.12 of Trademark Act.

TIPO ruled in Starbucks’ favor on January 22, 2026 pursuant to Article 30.1.10, finding that:

1.        Article 30.1.10 of Trademark Act provides that a mark shall not be registered if such a mark is identical or similar to another’s registered trademark, to be used in identical or similar goods or services, hence would cause confusion among the relevant consumers.

2.        The contested trademark consists of two letters “R” separated by a horizontal line “—”, whereas Starbucks’ cited trademarks consist of a star logo, a horizontal line “—”, and the letter “R”. The horizontal line “—” and the letter “R” would constitute the dominant portion of both trademarks. The presence of the star logo in Starbucks’ trademarks is insufficient to negate the overall similarity based on visual, phonetical, and conceptual impressions.

3.        On the designated services, both trademarks cover food, beverage, and restaurant services. The service categories of the contested trademark overlap with those covered by Starbucks’ cited trademarks.

4.        Based on records of trademark use, Starbucks’ cited trademarks have established strong brand image among the consumers in the local market, including the expansion of stores, worldwide trademark registrations, products sales, advertising materials, media coverage in GQ, VOUE, Marie Claire, ELLE, and BAZAAR, and marketing campaigns throughout 2014 and 2020. To the contrast, there was insufficient evidence demonstrating actual use of the contested trademark. Hence, consumers should be more familiar with Starbucks’ cited trademarks.

In view of the above, given the similarity between the trademarks, the overlap of the designated services, and Starbucks’ strong brand recognition, TIPO concluded that the contested trademark may cause consumer confusion. The registration of the contested trademark was cancelled accordingly.

Source: https://cloud.tipo.gov.tw/S282/S282WV1/#/written-result-details/disposition?issueKey=doNQI%2BOiBcgXpfsiAoib%2FOnYPEX1CXWCiTvf