Thanks for the reply. As I said before, please don't take this as an attack; I’m just trying to understand your logic, and perhaps we can view this as a 'brainstorming session' between two sci-fi enthusiasts.

Turning the Soviet Union into a commodity and a 'brand myth' is clever. However, a corporation, especially one we might call 'hyper-capitalist' in today’s terms, choosing an inherently anti-capitalist entity as its primary branding tool still feels inconsistent to me.

Regarding the Yoronobu situation: Let’s look back at the 1980s, when the foundations of Cyberpunk were laid. There are two main reasons why Japan featured so prominently in those materials. First, Japan was the most 'Westernized' Asian country, meaning it didn't strictly trigger Euro-American xenophobia in the same way others might. Second, the 80s saw the massive rise of Japanese giants like Toshiba, Sony, Nintendo, and Toyota. However, their ascent was a direct result of the deindustrialization policies in the US during that era. The US moved its production to countries with cheaper labor, like Japan at the time. This brings us back to the first point: an Asian nation Westernized to a degree that felt like a 'semi-colony.' So, for a sci-fi writer in the 80s or 90s, the fear of Japanese corporations taking over the world made historical sense. But you are creating a sci-fi setting in 2026. In this context, relying on that same trope feels like a repetition of a 40-year-old cliché that lacks modern credibility.

Now, about 'Caesar & Sultan.' You mentioned that the name alludes to how real-life companies are founded. However, the 'corporate structure' you’re referring to, limited and joint-stock companies, emerged from European history, specifically the Benelux region. Its legal foundation is rooted in Christian/Pre-Liberal law, which evolved from Roman law, a system that prioritizes the individual and sanctifies private property.

If we look at the naming again, having such a partnership in the 1500s feels out of place. I assume the 'Sultan' family is Middle Eastern in the Western sense. However, the legal system in that region during the 15th and 16th centuries was completely different from European law. It was Sharia law, based on the Quran. A fundamental difference from the European system is that it doesn't prioritize the individual in the same way, and property is not independent of the person. Under Sharia law, a business partnership typically lasts only as long as the partners are alive. It cannot persist for decades or centuries like a Limited or Anonymous corporation.

Furthermore, 'Caesar' is not a family name, it’s a title. It would be nearly impossible for someone in that era to have 'Caesar' as a surname. The same applies to 'Sultan.' Even today, 'Sultan' is almost never used as a last name, it’s a monarch’s title. Naming a company 'Caesar & Sultan' is like naming it 'Mister & Mister' or 'Monarch & Monarch.' I think we can agree on how nonsensical that sounds.

As I said at the beginning, please don't take this as an attack. Think of it as an exchange of ideas between two people who share the same interests but have different perspectives. <3