On the contrary, I think it is something insisted on by MBAs at the software companies themselves. A well-brainwashed MBA thinks in terms of brands: creating brands, growing brands, re-branding, etc. If you have a successful product, the best possible thing you can do with that product is use it to enhance your brand. Good products promote and establish a brand, and then the brand lets you make money selling products whose quality is irrelevant.

Otherwise, you'd be stuck selling products based on their quality and individual value, which is stupid, because the quality of your product depends mostly on people who haven't gone to business school, and is thus completely out of responsible hands.

Therefore, the primary purpose of an installed piece of software is to remind users of its brand, which in most cases is the name of the company or studio that created it.

Whatever the reason, in my experience it is definitely the case that marketing and legal both like to sit in the lap of whoever draws the short stick and has to implement the installer.

I'd have less of a problem if that hierarchy seemed useful. I usually see a <company> folder, and under that, 3 things. <program>, of course; a link to README.txt; and the uninstaller.

Just put <program> at the root and be done with it. I most likely don't have more than the one app from you.

One of the few vendors that I'm rather likely to have multiple products from is Microsoft, and of course they have to be different and delight in having <Microsoft - product name>.