I stand by the points made by franky1, no one owns bitcoin and there is no trademark conflict here, we are here talking about decentralization but what everyone here is having a different opinion, if there is bitcoin attached you need to move that to the core, core is a team that helps in developing bitcoin and it is not a centralized authority and they do not own bitcoin.
no
ok my last couple posts where ELI-5.. lets take it a layer deeper and go to ELI-15
core is a team that develop bitcoin-CORE.... NOT BITCOIN (2013-2016)
the core team do not develop other nodes they only develop one node bitcoin core.(2013-2016)
there are other nodes of other programming languages that in a decentralised world would run on the same currency network as core does.
in a healthy same network consensus competition of decentralisation..
but core want to own the network. to have no competition. unless the other nodes are subsiduaries of core and want to be SHEEP to core rules rather than consensus/decentralisated competition
think of it this way
imagine core as 'bank of america'(BoA)
the currency network which BoA runs on is U.S dollar. there used to be other banks that also run on the U.S dollar network.
BoA(bitcon core)
JPMorgan(bitcoinXT)
wells fargo(bitcoin classic)
goldman sachs(bitcoin unlimited)
all wanting to run on the U.S dollar network and
all have to lobby with the nation on how U.S dollar regulations should change
(all wanting to stay on the same network and all wanting to use the beauty of satoshis 'consensus' invention of one network and upgrade by majority decision.)
but BoA REKT them
(2017+)
so now BoA own the U.S dollar network and those other banks are gone (for bitcoin analogy purposs only)
now BoA not only control a payment network. they want to claim they own "dollar" and say australians cannot say/trade or use "dollar" any more