> Good business names and domains are always in demand, being able to acquire those together with trademarks is even more attractive as a business investment. If branded social media accounts are included, now you have a startup package that many established businesses don’t have.
How could you legitimately use the brand name, domain name, or branded social media accounts of a different company?
Sketchy SEO could use it. Or a criminal enterprise that needs a veneer of respectability. Or a business in a country with PR challenges could use the identity of a different company that didn't have those barriers.
But what legitimate things could, say, a US startup do with a defunct YC startup's brand?
Maybe you could do it legally, but wouldn't it be confusing every time you talk with a prospective investor, customer, or vendor?
"Oh, I see the confusion, ha ha... No we're not the Foobr that lost everyone's money, shut down abruptly on their customers, and maybe had to negotiate on their final bills from vendors... We're actually the Foobr that has the resourceful grit to graverob a failed brand. I know, it's a feather in our cap, we're not too modest to admit!"
At least until very recently (and to a certain extent even today still) many different companies would have the same name and similar branding despite being in vastly different industries.
Good names are hard (something any programmer should be familiar with) so it really just doesn't make sense to not use a name or domain that would work well for your brand just because a previous company existed at one point in the past.
It does seem to be a shame to throw away hard-built branding, especially when much larger brands get bought and sold every day. It seems like a win to restore an old vintage brand (vintage in HN terms might be anything from the previous batch!)
This approach was cleverly used by a PC company in the 80s/90s, Packard Bell. That brand had been a radio company from the depression into the late 60s, when the company failed.
When PCs were starting to take off, parents of boomers were interested in getting a PC but unsure what to buy, so a familiar brand was attractive.
This was widely discussed in the business press at the time, and various other bramds were revived for this reason.
In the case of Shinola they aren’t reviving the brand in this fashion, but I assume they think a bit of familiarity, even as a joke, might help (I only knew Shinola from “can’t tell shit from Shinola” and only after I saw a Shinola shop a few years ago did I bother to even look it up).
Effectively it’s no different than any other acquisition. There is nothing inherently nefarious about buying business assets for the brand and not the actual business itself.
As an example when RadioShack was in bankruptcy a PE group acquired the brand/IP for $26M. A couple years later that PE group resold the IP to a group in South America that relaunched RadioShack retail stores, but they could have used the brand in connection with a business unrelated to electronics retail stores.
It wasn't YC, and the company is around in other non-handset markets, but Nokia phones sold today are made by an unrelated company that merely licenses the brand name.
Additionally most startups are somewhat niche in the beginning. As long as you are planning to use the brand/domain for a different customer audience I don't think it would be confusing.
it happens all the time, companies go bust and get sold for pennies. they get bought and then pivot towards something the new owners want to invest into.
How could you legitimately use the brand name, domain name, or branded social media accounts of a different company?
Sketchy SEO could use it. Or a criminal enterprise that needs a veneer of respectability. Or a business in a country with PR challenges could use the identity of a different company that didn't have those barriers.
But what legitimate things could, say, a US startup do with a defunct YC startup's brand?
Maybe you could do it legally, but wouldn't it be confusing every time you talk with a prospective investor, customer, or vendor?
"Oh, I see the confusion, ha ha... No we're not the Foobr that lost everyone's money, shut down abruptly on their customers, and maybe had to negotiate on their final bills from vendors... We're actually the Foobr that has the resourceful grit to graverob a failed brand. I know, it's a feather in our cap, we're not too modest to admit!"