That actually makes me more disinclined to use Moz-- this isn't a snap-retort by an overeager in-house lawyer looking to earn their fee, this is the COO claiming that "Doz" is a trademark violation because it ends on "oz". It's flat-out depressing, and giving overt hints about "Change your name or we'll sue" ahead of time doesn't make this any better.
I just feel that shifts from a "we're going to legally bully you" to "cmon, we let you know".
If someone were to get a notice saying, "Hey, we're going to drop a bomb on you in 3 months. You might want to leave." and continues to live there stubbornly, then complains a bomb got dropped on them, whose fault is it? Clearly it doesn't mean you didn't get a bomb dropped on you, but it kind of nullifies your right to complain about it.
There's a difference between "fault" and "blame" that's not easily expressed in the english language, but I'm going to go ahead and call bullshit on your analogy. If someone is going to do something of questionable legality and warns you about it beforehand, does that make it "more legal"? I'll bet you think that people in high-crime areas should "just move out if they don't want to get mugged", too. But here, I have an analogy too:
I decide, say in January, that I want to change my company name from "Foobaz" to "Baz". Over the next 6 months, I go out to a bunch of startups named "Caz", "Faz", and "Jaz", and say "Hey so you might want to change your name because I'm going to change my company's name to Baz and I'm totally going to drop a legal hammer on you if you don't because I can afford it and you can't". After those 6 months are up, I change my name, and then flip around and start suing because they "didn't take my warning".
