A trademark battle is brewing at Starbucks. We spill the beans on what to know.

A brewing trademark fight between Starbucks and the union representing its workers has spilled into federal court in Philadelphia.

Workers United, the union representing Starbucks baristas nationwide, filed a lawsuit Friday asking a judge to declare that the workers have a right to use their employer’s name and a similar logo in union materials.

Five years into a national campaign to unionize branches of the Seattle-based coffee giant under the banner of Starbucks Workers United, and secure a first union contract, questions remain on whether the name infringes on the corporation’s copyright.

Starbucks Workers United is part of Workers United, which has over 86,000 members in manufacturing, apparel, food service, and other industries.

Starbucks previously argued that the union’s name, in conjunction with the campaign’s logo that riffs off Starbucks’ logo, could cause people to confuse the union and coffee chain.

But the union doesn’t think anyone is attempting to order a grande skinny-latte with an extra pump of vanilla from its website.

Starbucks Workers United “clearly identifies itself as a distinct organization,” the suit says, and has no interest in conflating itself with the company, which it accuses of unlawful union busting.

“Our globally iconic brand is the outward representation of who we are as a company, and we will always take steps to prevent misuse that could create confusion for our customers,” Jaci Anderson, Starbucks’ director of global communications, said in a statement.

The union did not respond to a request for comment.

The company previously sued the union in an Iowa federal court over the name and logo usage. The 2023 lawsuit said that because the union used the Starbucks name, people could confuse the union’s political statements online with the company’s official positions.

Workers United filed a countersuit against Starbucks the same day in federal court in Philadelphia, where the union is based, quoting social media posts by the union chastising the company.

“No one would mistake these as statements of Starbucks Corporation,” the suit said.

The parties agreed in late 2024 to negotiate the dispute outside court. Both cases were dismissed in early 2025.

But those negotiations fell apart, and a settlement was never reached, according to the new lawsuit. It will now be up to U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson to help the sides reach a settlement or, eventually, rule on the matter.

Starbucks workers in Buffalo, N.Y., were the first to unionize in 2021. Since then, hundreds of Starbucks stores have unionized, according to Starbucks Workers United.

The coffee company has several dozen stores in Philadelphia and the surrounding counties. Multiple city and suburban locations are unionized, including West Philadelphia locations at Penn Medicine, Schuylkill Yards, 39th and Walnut Streets, and 34th and Walnut Streets.

But unionized workers at the coffee company are still without a first contract. Several tentative agreements had been reached as of November — but sticking points emerged around financial proposals, and unfair labor practice charges that the union filed against the company remained unresolved, the union said.

As negotiations stalled, the union launched an open-ended national strike in November that included several Philadelphia stores. Shortly before the strike was called, the company said it would close hundreds of underperforming stores, including six in Philadelphia, facing declining sales at some stores amid a rise in labor costs and coffee prices.

As of February, some striking workers were back at their jobs, while over 1,000 were still out on strike, according to a union spokesperson.

Starbucks announced in March that workers could earn an annual bonus of up to $1,200 based on their location’s performance. The company has also directed workers to implement new customer service practices like writing messages to customers on cups, and preparing orders in four minutes or less.