I understand the sentiment of the article, and the business strategy could be the most lucrative; however, the article itself suggests none of the players, auth

I understand the sentiment of the article, and the business strategy could be the most lucrative; however, the article itself suggests none of the players, author included, actually understand trademark law. A few of the legal issues I spot include: 1.) Though not registered with USPTO the original Sriracha manufacturers may have certain common law trademark rights as the first to enter the stream of commerce; 2.) that in theory nothing would have prohibited the trademarking of Sriracha while simultaneously providing a free limited license allowing competitors to use the mark; and 3.) the article seems to suggest it would have been possible for someone to come along after the original Sriracha and trademark the name, then prohibit the use of Sriracha by the original company.