The comedian Nathan Fielder has outed himself as the man behind a parody coffee shop called Dumb Starbucks that appeared to throw down a gauntlet to the real Starbucks.

The star of the Comedy Central show Nathan For You gave a press conference at the Los Angeles outlet on Monday revealing the scheme was a TV stunt rather than an art installation or business start-up.

The cafe opened in the Los Feliz neighbourhood last Friday, mimicking the Starbucks logo, decor and menu but prefixing offerings with the word “dumb”.

Long lines formed as word spread on the street and social media, prompting debate over whether it was Banksy-style pop-up art or an entrepreneur’s audacious attempt to simultaneousy mock and purloin the Starbucks brand.

Starbucks said in a statement it was aware of the store, which was not affiliated. The statement said: “We are evaluating next steps and while we appreciate the humour, they cannot use our name, which is a protected trademark.”

Cups stand on display cases at Dumb Starbucks. Photograph: Jonathan Alcorn/Reuters Photograph: JONATHAN ALCORN/REUTERS

By Monday afternoon digging by the Associated Press and others linked the site, in the corner of a strip mall, to Fielder’s production company, Abso Lutely Productions.

He ended the speculation by uploading a video in which he appeared as a barista and declared himself the founder and president of Dumb Starbucks. “Many of you probably know me as a comedian. But this is no joke. This is a real business I plan to get rich from. But I need your support.”

Keeping a straight face at a press conference outside he continued in the same vein. “I’m proud to announce we’ll be opening our second Starbucks in Brooklyn, New York soon … This really caught on so I’m going to ride it out.”

A rather large question mark hung over that ambition: the stunt will be included in the Nathan for You docu-reality series, which stages public hoaxes. Plus, legal experts said the outlet stretched the first amendment’s protection of parody and probably violated the real Starbucks trademark.

A fact sheet posted inside the shop claimed that by adding the word “dumb” it was technically making fun of Starbucks and so could use their trademarks under a law known as fair use.

“Dumb Starbucks needs to be categorised as a work of parody art. So, in the eyes of the law, our ‘coffee shop’ is actually an art gallery and the ‘coffee’ you’re buying is considered the art. But that’s for our lawyers to worry about. All you need to do is enjoy our delicious coffee!”





The store was closed by 6pm local time, disappointing would-be customers outside.

On Twitter many saluted what they called a clever publicity stunt. “Somehow both the most idiotic and brilliant thing ever,” tweeted @jackie527



A Dumb Starbucks menu board. Photograph: Jonathan Alcorn/Reuters Photograph: JONATHAN ALCORN/REUTERS

If the store reopens or if Fielder tries to open a second outlet he will likely face legal challenge from the Seattle-based corporation.

Starbucks would probably win a trademark dilution claim on the grounds of damage to its goodwill and reputation, said Melissa Dagodag, a lawyer specialised in intellectual property. “I believe if the case is taken to court,” she said, “the court may be very likely to issue a permanent injunction against the operating of a coffee shop under the name Dumb Starbucks.”

Joseph Mandour, an attorney with Mandour & Associates, said to qualify as a parody – and thus avoid trademark infringement – it would have to be clear the Dumb Starbucks store was not associated in any way with the real chain, which has 20,000 outlets worldwide. “In this case Starbucks can definitely argue that some consumers might think this is a real Starbucks, or at a minimum that it is somehow related to the real Starbucks.”