4 ms·
> Preventing trademark erosion. > However, they don't seem to have good grounds for it in this case. Does that mean this is just suing companies for the sake
by sebazzz 6y ago
> Preventing trademark erosion.
> However, they don't seem to have good grounds for it in this case.
Does that mean this is just suing companies for the sake of suing?
- simsla 6y agoThat might be jumping the gun a bit. Malice for the sake of malice is usually one of the least credible options. Other valid possibilities: - They don't agree with me on the first point. - Someone followed an un-nuanced SOP. - They expect a strategic benefit from this kind of attitude. - People are making choices from a job-security perspective rather than a greater good (or even greater good of the company) perspective. - ...