[Rockingham]

These kinds of disputes are common when a commercial name brand becomes valuable and prominent through expansion. As it happens, trademark law more or less forces an aggressive legal posture or the value of the expanding name brand is undermined and sometimes lost by exceptions being tolerated.

For example, what if the small Beaver's Mini Mart decides to create a chain of large size Beaver's Mega Marts with a similar size, format, and logo to that of Buc-ee's? Buc-ee's could sue, but their case would be complicated by their prior toleration of Beaver's name, logo, and operation of smaller format gas and go markets.

To prevent that risk, Buc-ee's best strategy is to sue now. The usual practice is to then agree to a settlement that restricts the smaller operation from ever infringing Buc-ee's trademark. That way, if the small operator ever goes rogue, Buc-ee's can go to court and sue to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement.

[NorthMountain]

restricts the smaller operation from ever infringing Buc-ee's trademark

That rather begs the question.

Beaver Mart's logo looks nothing like Buc-ee's ...

There's no infringement now. If Beaver Mart decided to expand, using its existing logo, there would still be no infringement.

This isn't trademark protection, it's "lawfare".