As a recipient of a few of these over the years I have to comment on how humane this is. A particular C&D I once had the displeasure of receiving seemed purposed more towards tying my stomach in knots and keeping me up at night then actually protecting the brand. The outcome here provides the same result, just much, much, more comfortable for the parties involved.
I got a C&D letter once from a real asshole who tried to get me to stop providing after-market documentation for his trademarked software. I responded with a very simple letter. "Thank you for your concern. I will personally audit the documentation to make sure your trademarks are appropriately credited. If you notice any documentation which lacks a notice saying you are the author of this trademark, please let me know as soon as possible so I can correct this oversight."
Nice. It took me a couple to understand that C&D's were preferred to legal action (I received a few from some really big firms). While researching the issue, under a small bead of sweat, I actually found conference papers from the originating firms outlining the preference of C&D's to expensive legal action. My personal experience with them seemed like glorified take down notices, which were easily complied with, but the language can be damn scary.
They are serious business, but, if some of these cases can be handled as humanely as the OP's example, a lot of people could sleep better at night.
