you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 44 points 2 years ago (11 children)

Those with deep pockets can threaten expensive legal action even if they know they won't win, simply because those without deep pockets cannot afford to fight the legal battle without going bankrupt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 88 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    but its unilever. they have nearly unlimited funds to fight musk... if they wanted to

    i suspect they just didnt want the unilever name and its bazillion brands brought into public lawsuits for marketing reasons

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Oh, I know nothing about Unilever specifically, you may be right. In either case, the basic "Cost not worth the price" reasoning still applies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    You probably know some of their brands

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    ... a lot of those are repeated multiple times?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Yeah, I was like, "Wow, I didn't know Slim Fast was from Madrid. Wow, I didn't know Slim Fast was from Vladivostok. Wow, I didn't know Slim Fast was from Anchorage. Wow, I'd didn't know Slim Fast was from Tiksi. Wow, I didn't know Slim Fast was from Chihuahua. Wow, I didn't know Slim Fast was from Jaipur. Wow, I didn't know Slim Fast was from Alert...."

    "Waaaaiidaminute..."

  • source
  • parent