>>And the victim, of course, is the consumer. Whatever the confectioners paid for this is surely not coming out of their personal pockets, it's all in the price of the next one you buy. Even if you buy from competition, because they are forced into responding, which will cost them you.
>
>I think the real damage being done by commercialization is to our sense of innocence: we can't believe anyone has an innocent passion for, e.g., Kit-kats. Might it not be true that the engineers at Google like kit-kats, and that was the entire basis for the decision? Even if true, in the present age we can't conceive of it being true.

If it was true, we'd have a nice paradox: they wouldn't be able to use the name out of pure innocent passion, as such names are trademarked, registerbranded, copyright&lefted and whatnot. And even if they asked for permission of the owner of the rights to use the name for free, and got it, it's a Google - nobody would believe that no money changed pockets.

So, yes, innocence is gone. Anything touched by advertising is dirty.