Actually, our initial approach was directly to Asa Dotzler. His responses were consistent and unyielding — our legal staff (AOL's legal staff) says we can and we've done it and that's the end of it.
Here, she notes that Asa's response appears to be "Sorry, but my lawyer says it's legal, so we can use it" and expresses her anger that Asa isn't considering the 'ethical' side of it. Whether you agree or disagree is irrelevant.
Now here's Ann Harrison reminiscing on InterBase's "beginings" (sic) ( from http://www.ibphoenix.com/a656.htm -- mirrored in case it gets edited ):
"Groton Database Systems" is an inspired name, inspired by our failure to find any other name that passed trademark search. We were naive new entrepreneurs, so each time we thought of a name, we asked our lawyer "is this OK?" Later we learned that the right question is "can you defend us if we use this?" That sophistication let us change the name to InterBase, a change encouraged by the person who answered the phone "Rrrrotten Database Systems."
I'm sorry, but am I the only one who sees a little conflict here? Later she learned that the right question is simply "can you defend us if we use this"? Ann, can you explain how this is different?