As some may know, there is an International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (the ICNCP for short) which is published by the International Society for Horticultural Science, and which is supposed to be updated every 10 years after a symposium among participating horticultural taxonomists, plant breeders and other interested parties to discuss and agree on changes. LOL Taxonomists agreeing? Not likely. The most recent is the 8th edition from 2009. Find information at
http://www.ishs.org/sci/icracpco.htm and also
http://www.ishs.org/sci/icra.htm.
There are guidelines in the code about naming nearly any kind of cultivated variety, whether seed or clonally propagated. However, following the rules is not mandatory since ISHS has no legal standing to enforce them.
The main concern is trying to prevent duplication of names, the general thought being that it's worse to have two different cultivars being offered by the same name than to have one cultivar being offered under multiple names - although of course that is not desirable either.
Multiplication of names became a real problem when applying "trademark" names became common. Then a plant often has the cultivar name cited in addition to the trademarked name, which one is not free to use without license. This is a ploy to avoid the limitations of plant patents, which expire after 20 years, but if the buyers only recognize a plant by the trademark name, they won't realize the real name is the cultivar name and that the plant can be propagated and sold freely under that name. An example of a trademark name in tomatoes would be the "Goliath" designation.
As several of you have observed, those who are looking to profit will choose names as best suits their purpose, and then it becomes
caveat emptor, which is not new in horticulture at all, is it?