> And that was well-documented in the initial post. I mean, there was some documentation. I don't know if it was well documented. There's like 160 million rea

> And that was well-documented in the initial post. I mean, there was some documentation. I don't know if it was well documented. There's like 160 million reasons why the other company has better documentation. Ultimately, the a point of holding a trademark is to give you some legal firepower. Going up against the company with $160 million, you're pretty much screwed anyway. Their best bet in this scenario is to just use the name anyway and not piss them off. There are plenty of organizations, even very for-profit companies, that use the same name and don't have any problem with it because it's not confusing anybody or pissing anyone off.