You're making my point for me - that's a legally approved transfer of assets. This is not.

Your claim was that the distinction is that it is run by a different person, not that it wasn't a "legally approved transfer of assets".

I regret using the word "person." luv too be nitpicked on HN

The better version of my argument is "the product is not the same because it was not appropriately transferred between operators."

Of course this is all squishy and grey, since I don't believe DataTau filed a trademark claim, but moving forward with an identically-named product is still poor taste.