> It’s the product’s name, so clearly it must be a factual description of what it does.
Nope. If it's misleading, it doesn't matter. Names don't have to be verbatim, but they should not be misleading.
> show me where it claims in any way shape or form that you are buying a cartridge of ink that you can keep using after your subscription
Not my claim. What I'm saying is that I believe the name and advertising could be seen as misleading in a similar way to existing class action lawsuits. It doesn't matter that the hpconnected site is ranked higher in google; the hp.com site for instantink is pretty misleading as seen in all the points in the other thread.
Maybe you don't think veggie straws was misleading either, but a class action lawsuit [1] came of it. My original point was that the name of the product is more significant than you implied in your comment.
Nope. If it's misleading, it doesn't matter. Names don't have to be verbatim, but they should not be misleading.
> show me where it claims in any way shape or form that you are buying a cartridge of ink that you can keep using after your subscription
Not my claim. What I'm saying is that I believe the name and advertising could be seen as misleading in a similar way to existing class action lawsuits. It doesn't matter that the hpconnected site is ranked higher in google; the hp.com site for instantink is pretty misleading as seen in all the points in the other thread.
Maybe you don't think veggie straws was misleading either, but a class action lawsuit [1] came of it. My original point was that the name of the product is more significant than you implied in your comment.
1: https://truthinadvertising.org/class-action/sensible-portion...