Me and my coworkers know screen but we don't call it "screen sharing", it's more of a "tool that makes processes not die after you quit ssh".

One of the main audiences he's pitching this to is developers (for pair programming etc.) so it's more of an issue than it would be for a pure consumer tool.

This is the same reason why HNers at the time failed to see why Dropbox succeeded and curl + git + sftp on Linux isn't sufficient for end users to solve their problem [0]. They just don't care about your GNU tools, even if it does better at SEO.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

That analogy doesn't hold. People aren't saying that you should just use GNU Screen instead, they're saying that the name creates confusion. Totally different.

Well that 'confusion' is between developers and there are many other business tools out there with similar names which from the perspective of an average customer, they will still use it and won't care about a name clash with a decades old developer tool used only by software engineers.

For the majority of businesses looking at 'Screen' now, they won't bat an eyelid and will use it along as it 'just works' no matter the name conflict. If they saw GNU Screen they'll just say 'What's that' and forget about it.

"People here are saying..." is the parent's argument. The situation is very similar: people here, on this forum, aren't a representative sample of the market, outside. That statement holds even when said market is comprised of developers.