thats the thing about trademarks you have to defend them afaik otherwise they are worthless. I would venture these stupid suits are there in case some drink company will make a monster drink the defence would be better.
ianal
What if there's no infringement at all? As is clearly the case here.
Well, that's what lawyers often say about trademark law. But, then again, their advice to to pay lawyers more money to deal with the situation.
The reality is not nearly so cut and dried. You do have to police a trademark to some extent, and you can lose it for not policing it. So, it's not like the lawyers are lying. But any lawyer recommending action like this to "protect your trademark" is greatly exaggerating the risk in order to increase their billable hours.
Is this sort of self-disclosure really suitable or relevant here?