Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Sounds like you want trademark reform.
There are basically no requirements for maintaining trademarks. If a company owns a name they can use that name and branding forever, no matter how false it becomes, no matter how much the business or product changes, they can keep the name. This shouldn't be the case.
If an ice cream company is named after their two founders, the company shouldn't be able to keep using their names after they're no longer involved. But under current laws they can.
A glass company can build its reputation on making heatproof glass, then change the glass so its no longer heatproof, while still selling it under the same name. This is unjust.
Companies should be forced to rebrand upon major changes. Current trade mark laws are fundamentally misleading.
The point of trademarks is to avoid market confusion.
MTV didn't instantly eliminate all of it's programming and created new programming overnight. They had reality TV shows playing alongside music videos in the 90s. There are some people that might like a reality show that was on MTV when they were playing music videos, then suddenly the name of the company changes because they don't play music and those people can't find the show they like? Even though it's still on, still being made by the same company, but under a different name because curmudgeons don't think it's appropriate that a company with the letter M in it's name isn't focused on music?
Trademarks are about people being able to know which company they're buying from. The name of the company is relatively arbitrary. You could start a company making computers and give it an arbitrary name like I don't know "Apple". then people will associate the quality of the computers with that arbitrary name "Apple". Well you could if someone didn't do exactly that already. It's not so much the name it's the consistency that matters most.
And many names we just kind of forget their origins because they're irrelevant to what the company now does. Does Motorolla have to change it's name because they no longer make record players for cars? Does DC have to rebrand because very few of their comics are about detectives? KFC can't call themselves that because a vast majority of their restaurants aren't in Kentucky?
I'd actually go the other way if anything. Make it illegal for a company to change it's name. Facebook promotes eating disorders to teenagers? Sorry you aren't changing your name to Meta, you can't do bad shit and erase that negative brand association by re-branding. You want your brand to be considered good? Then do better.