Re: Am I the only one...
The purpose of trademark is to prevent consumer confusion. In this sense, it's less an "intellectual property" thing and more a "consumer protection" thing.
Not really, otherwise what's the justification for companies being able to sue over infringement? Trademarks exist to stop people trading on the reputation of others, which has both a business protection aspect and a consumer protection aspect. Consumer protection laws protect consumers, if a product isn't fit for purpose it doesn't really matter what company you bought it from in that respect. If you thought you bought it from a reputable company, but it was actually counterfeit, then the counterfeiter has taken business away from them by taking advantage of their better reputation and damaged that reputation.
It seems doubtful to me. The key for a trademark infringement isn't that there's similarity between marks. It's if someone could reasonably buy one thing thinking it was the other. In this case, it's hard to see how that would happen.
Both are basically small format computer devices. You might argue that Android is an OS, but most consumers will find it on a device, you don't buy an Android Pie CD or download. Say I now come along with a cheap android IOT platform with an app that lets you do some simple scripting to send out messages in response to signal on a couple of pins, and sell this on eBay as a Tweety Pie, what's RPF's position now? Has that position been weakened because of Google's product name?