SamBuck's v. Starbucks -- This trademark ruling is just too juicy to miss, even during the last week of class. Sam Buck opened a coffee shop named after herself in Astoria, OR in 2000, when there were no Starbucks shops in the city. Two years later, Starbucks did open there and they sent her a cease-and-desist letter. Buck refused to drop the name. Last week, a federal judge ruled she had "willfully infringed" and diluted the Starbucks mark -- how does this ruling strike you? What are the significant facts that support your view that it's correct or not? Isn't this a "reversal" of the Victor's Little Secret case? PS -- Google this topic and you will see much vitriol in the blogosphere on it.