Reply to comment

The guidelines are actually not written, as many have blogged, in lawyerese, That is one of the problems.

A competent lawyer would at least mention the fair use doctrine and would certainly not have signed off on the nonsense that matter critical of the company must not use the company's name. (See US Constitution, Amendment I) A competent lawyer would have made clear there are different audiences for these guidelines and that intellectual property claims of this type are largely restricted to the company's commercial competitors, not its customers. A competent lawyer may even have quietly suggested that some consultation with the community was in order before threatening all manner of fire and brimstone.

I do not think the author of these guidelines is an evil person or was acting maliciously. Nor do I think the company's lawyers are this incompetent. I do think the company's decisions are not being checked or reviewed properly because of a leadership vacuum. The transition to a new CEO needs to be short. And the new CEO has to see their mission as running the company, not advancing rationales for poor performance as elaborate as they are vacuous.