Making no judgements about this, I would point out that the name Apache, like a lot of names for native American groups were used by the Spanish as they went across that part of the Americas. Various Spanish "explorers" of that era had many different names for the same group, per Wikipedia[1] and its citation[2]. The name Apache was settled on to be the descriptor for the various groups sometime in the late 1890s/early 1900s by the Federal Government.<p>Obviously every discussion of naming winds up being controversial. On one hand, the name wasn't strictly culturally part of their identity until the Spanish came along, and probably not even until 1900s or so. But, the government essentially making it that particular group of people's identity then solidified that and enshrined it.<p>A question I would pose to everyone responding negatively here is this: If it were clearly a profit-motivated company using this name, like, say, Microsoft, Apple, or Google, would it be as obvious that they "shouldn't change their name"?<p>I'm not convinced there's a good answer here but maybe the authors do have a point regarding the Apache Foundation's support of native communities that bear the name they've trademarked and use.<p>[1]: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache#Name" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache#Name</a><p>[2]: Brugge, David M. (1968). Navajos in the Catholic Church Records of New Mexico 1694 - 1875. Window Rock, Arizona: Research Section, The Navajo Tribe.<p><pre><code> In a detailed study of New Mexico Catholic Church records, David M. Brugge identifies 15 tribal names which the Spanish used to refer to the Apache. These were drawn from records of about 1000 baptisms from 1704 to 1862.</code></pre>