The author revisits a past prediction about a presidential renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. This change was motivated by a desire to spite Mexico due to perceived racist feelings. The author notes that while presidents can technically change official geographical names, this particular instance was politically manufactured. The author expresses concern that their earlier predictions about how Google and Apple would handle the naming on their maps were accurate. Both companies reportedly display "Gulf of America" in the US, "Gulf of Mexico" in Mexico, and "Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America)" elsewhere.The author believes a more nuanced approach is needed, suggesting that the US should see "Gulf of America (Gulf of Mexico)" and the rest of the world should simply see "Gulf of Mexico." This would localize the controversial name change to the country that implemented it. The author argues that other nations should not bear the consequences of this political action. They feel this is the most realistic and integrity-maintaining solution for multinational corporations.The author reiterates that avoiding controversy is impossible, but minimizing it is reasonable. They believe their suggested approach of labeling the body of water "Lake America (Lake Ontario)" for US users and simply "Lake Ontario" for the rest of the world is the best path forward. This strategy acknowledges the political reality while limiting wider exposure to the controversial renaming.