For the last eight years Starbucks attorneys have been trying to force Black Bear Micro Roastery, whose coffee is sold at The Den in Portsmouth, to change the name of its Mister Charbucks dark roast, to the tune of roughly $150,000 in damages and court fees.

The suit claims that Black Bear is looking to benefit from the Starbucks' trademark by selling coffee under the rhyming name, thus violating trademark infringement laws.

"It just keeps going on and on," said Jim Clark, owner of both Black Bear, located in Center Tuftonboro, and The Den.

It all started back in August of 1997, when Clark received a phone call from a Starbucks attorney who threatened a lawsuit unless they change the name of the dark blend. Clark refused to settle for Starbucks' offer of $2,500 to cover his legal fees in 1998, and since 2001, he has been traveling back and forth to a U.S. District Court in New York City to battle Starbucks' attorneys.

He said that every time he attends a court session it seems that Starbucks' attorneys don't provide enough evidence to hold court, so the date is rescheduled. "They don't have to prove damages before they drag you into court," said Clark, who believes that most little companies would settle out of court out of intimidation from the big guys.

One might wonder, why bother fighting such a large company over a little name?

"They barged in and told us what they wanted. You can't come into my house and tell me what to do," said Clark. "Then it became a patriotic issue, and that's what it is today."

Starbucks is known for being an aggressive defender of its name, its logo and the names of its coffees, having sued or considering litigation against, among others, Sam Buck's coffee shop in Astoria, Ore.; Haidabucks in northwest Canada; and a Brooklyn-based coffee shop selling Warbucks coffee. With its eye on rampant growth in China, the company has engaged with Shanghai-based Xingbake, for allegedly copying its logo and Chinese-language name, and with Taipei's Penland Star Coffee, which uses a similar logo. In 2000, Starbucks sued a San Francisco artist over a parody of its logo (the artist won the right to continue the parody, though not for a profit).

Clark believes that the next step will be to go to trial and have a jury decide the fate of Mister Charbucks. But Clark's insurance company, Zurich, has been paying for court and attorney fees. Recently Zurich has shown interest in settling with Starbucks' attorneys regardless of Clark's opposition. Zurich, however, will have to go through a U.S. District Court judge to do so.

Clark believes that the judge won't allow Zurich to back down, "but you can never be sure what a judge is thinking," said Clark.

If Zurich continues to pay, then the case will eventually go to trial, possibly this spring, around the same time that Starbucks will be in court with a Texas bar owner who's been selling Starbock beer.

"Everyone's amazed we got this far," said Clark. "The next person may get crushed if I don't stand up for myself."

Clark expressed his concerns for other little companies, who come by the same problems with bigger corporations, and without knowing their rights, settle out of court at a big price. "People are handing money over to these big companies, not knowing any better," said Clark. "They (Starbucks) can disillusion individuals and end up getting court fees reimbursed."

He said that, historically, a big company has never won a case citing trademark violations against a little company. The little company may settle out of the suit, but it won't lose.

For example, in March 2003, famous lingerie manufacturer Victoria's Secret lost a major lawsuit against a small Kentucky sex shop, Victor's Little Secret. The U.S. Supreme Court voted unanimously in favor of the sex shop, saying that its trademark did not infringe on the more famous of the two and that the company had to show it had suffered actual damages when a small business used a similar name.

"I have one dream," said Clark. "I'd like to have a T-shirt that reads: We're the little company that beat Starbucks out of U.S. District Court."