> The reason why "Stripe, Inc." is interesting is because it disproves the whole claim that users can trust the business name displayed, because they can't.
The only people who made this claim, did it so they could attack it.
The only claim of the EV system is that the display name matches a real legal entity, which is not the same thing as being consumer-recognizable.
The intent with EV was that the presence of its UI element--regardless of what it said--would confer trust. The idea does not rely on users recognizing the company name any more than trust in physical stores relies on users memorizing street addresses.
The concept is that a legit company would opt to tie its online presence back to its legal entity (via an EV cert), but a scam would not because doing so would take more effort and make it harder to escape.
Again: this is analogous to the effort that it takes to set up a physical store. You can buy things off the back of a truck, but everyone knows that is sketchy. You don't know where that stuff came from, and you have no recourse once the truck drives away.
Setting up a store is a lot harder than driving up a truck--a company has to establish a legal presence in the jurisdiction, sign a lease, get a business license, comply with all sorts of regulations, pay taxes, etc. But they go through that effort because doing so confers trust. It is this system that is behind the social convention that it's ok to walk into a new store and hand them your credit card to buy something.
The goal of EV, of the CA system in general, was to try to create a similar set of trust signifiers and conventions online.
