I really don't understand npm Inc. line of thinking here. > In this case, we believe that most users who would come across a kik package, would reasonably expe

I really don't understand npm Inc. line of thinking here. > In this case, we believe that most users who would come across a kik package, would reasonably expect it to be related to kik.com By this logic a trademark will automatically be awarded to the largest company regardless of all other factors but this is not how Trademark law works. Is Azer's use of `kik` disingenuous or misleading in any way? I would say no. His use of `kik` is in reference to "Kick starter" which has nothing to do with Kik.com [who has a Trademark registered](https://trademarks.justia.com/858/93/kik-85893307.html https://trademarks.justia.com/858/93/kik-85893307.html) with the following description... > Computer software for use with mobile devices, namely, computers, personal digital assistants (PDAs) and mobile phones for downloading, displaying, transmitting, receiving, editing, extracting, encoding, decoding, playing, storing and organizing text, sound, images, audio files and video files Azer's `kik` package is clearly not infringing on kik.com marketshare and his use of the term "kik" appears to be valid as it relates to "Kick starter" and has nothing to do with "downloading, displaying, transmitting, receiving, editing, extracting, encoding, decoding, playing, storing and organizing text, sound, images, audio files and video files". npm Inc. should return this package name back to Azer. Kik.com is overreaching here and I see no case law to suggest that Kik.com should get this name handed to them just because they are the larger entity.