Ultimately no one is debating it's the companies call, what the debate is about is whether the company over reacted on noise or actively sourced evidence that keeping the founders name would indeed have negative impact on their profit line.
Did they, having had attention drawn to the name not want their company associated with any debate on the subject. Its been low key humming along for a while and its just negativity with no upside.
Its not a comfortable place for a company to be, having their name as part of a tug of war when you look at the foulness of how it can be used.
The people who are likely to defend you to the hilt, loudly, prominently and illiterately all over social media, arent the sort of people a company wants to be associated with.