I think you've got the right idea. Sears Roebuck built the building but it's not about the company, which doesn't exist anymore anyway. It's an iconic Chicago landmark, a marvel of modern engineering, and one of the most recognizable buildings in the world. Just as impressive today as it was when it opened 52 years ago. Building naming rights change hands all the time but virtually none of them carry the history or status of Sears Tower.

On one hand, a name is just a name. On the other, a name can carry a lot of connotations. We live in a capitalistic society where even the moniker on a building has a price tag and skyscrapers are "disposable" if you have enough money. I think there's some collective resentment to the idea that decades of history and "tradition" can be erased by writing a big enough check. Not to mention the fact that people don't like change, in spite of the fact that everything around us is changing constantly. I suppose resentment over renaming such a well known landmark is easy for us to collectively resist as kind of a catharsis.