Somehow I feel that in our world the majority of corporations don't make direct comparisons to their competitors that often, preferring to use "competing brands" or something of that variety instead.
Avoiding a lawsuit is easy in that case: The Intel lawyer would have to make the argument that Pentium PCs are, in fact, harmful. Which would have opened a whole new can of worms.
Hard to see how Intel could sue over a statement like that.
The reason many companies say "competing brands" is because they don't want to mention an alternative, because it increases the mindshare of the other brand.
"As for Pentium PCs... well, they're harmless."
without that resulting in lawsuits.
Somehow I feel that in our world the majority of corporations don't make direct comparisons to their competitors that often, preferring to use "competing brands" or something of that variety instead.