And a small primer on a small part of trademark law:

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/06/04/4273917/little-shop-runs-afoul-of-rockers.html

I'd love to see a group fight back and win but if they generally offer a reasonable licensing with proceeds to charity I'm ok with it. I doubt Kentucky Kingdom was offered a fee quite as reasonable though.

Well if you work hard to build a brand name then I believe you have every right to find and defend that name. With that being said, interesting article.

The twin sisters that formed their own coffee shop had never heard of the rock band the name of Twisted Sister. They just called their coffee shop, Twisted Sisters because they were twin sisters with a twisted kind of attitude. I sure am not going to confuse them with the rock band.

You had heard of the rock band. Prior to the article, you had never heard of the coffee shop. Name recognition.

True. Plus how many people thought of the band when they saw the coffee shop or bakery or eatery/etc and ate there because of the band...

More:

http://www.thedailymeal.com/twisted-sister-fights-back-against-name-thieves

There's a lot of arrogance on French's part.

Comparing the brand name recognition of Twisted Sister w/ Led Zepplin and the Stones is worthy of being flogged on the spot.

But legally speaking, he has a point about protecting his brand, although one could argue that any risduals he gets from itunes is probably helped more by having his band's name out there on roller coasters, coffee shops, etc... than by anything the band has done lately.