This seems like a bad decision to me that will ultimately harm consumers, if anyone can launch a product and say it’s made by “OpenAI”.

▲

VorpalWay 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Well, they could have used a less generic and misleading name (it is not very open, as noted in the article). OpenAI only really have themselves to blame here.

▲

Legend2440 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Plenty of companies use generic words for their name, and they still get trademarks.

American Airlines for example is indeed just an American airline. The Container Store, Vision Center, General Motors, International business machines (IBM), the list goes on.

Even Microsoft is just a contraction of their original product, microcomputer software.

▲

DrammBA 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I understood it more in the line of preventing a company from naming itself "Low sugar" and then blocking other companies from adding the words "Low sugar" to their packaging. Same thing with OpenAI, another company should be free to create an AI that's fully open and tag it as "Open AI" without fearing legal problems with OpenAI.

▲

raverbashing 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Even Microsoft is just a contraction of their original product, microcomputer software.

Hopefully that was also a family suggestion because I can't think of a more sloppy name than "Microcomputer software"

▲

literalAardvark 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In the US

	▲	Legend2440 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Many of these companies have EU trademarks as well.

▲

slibhb 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Give me a break. Apple doesn't sell apples.

▲

n6242 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Exactly. Apple can register Apple because they don't sell apples so it's not misleading. OpenAI can't register OpenAI because they make ai but it's not open. They could call themselves Peaches, OpenWombat or ClosedAI and there wouldn't be any issues because those wouldn't be misleading.

	▲	sebastiennight 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> OpenAI can't register OpenAI because they make ai but it's not open That's not the reason they can't. They can't register the trademark because it's a descriptive one. If I try to trademark "hacker forum", an EU trademark officer will reject it not because my website doesn't have hackers on it, but because it's descriptive and prevents others from starting hacker forums. So > They could call themselves... ClosedAI is also incorrect, because it's descriptive as well.
	▲	Legend2440 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		>OpenAI can't register OpenAI because they make ai but it's not open. Not the issue. Per the ruling even if their AI was open they still couldn't have the trademark.
	▲	burntalmonds 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Open could mean open to integration (API), or opens your mind, or opens possibilities.
	▲	slibhb 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		No, the opinion doesn't have to do with whether OpenAI is open.
	▲	helsinkiandrew 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[dead]

▲

3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

lokar 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do they have a trademark on the word apple with no other context? I thought it was Apple computer, which is distinct.

▲

VorpalWay 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Apple is also a record label (that existed before the computer company), specifically one owned by the Beatles.

There were even some legal battles between them, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

Apparently it ended with Apple Computers buying the trademark from Apple (record company) and then licencing it back (weird but ok).

	▲	kps 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sosumi

▲

freejazz 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's like you are starting to get it.

▲

NBJack 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You know, if it was someone offering a truly open (weights + training data) and available model running on consumer hardware in a privacy sandbox, I would welcome that "harm".

	▲	Legend2440 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's not going to be something like that. Anyone legitimate is going to want to use a different name because of the confusion. The only people naming something "OpenAI" are going to be trying to trick you into downloading their scammy chatGPT clone.

▲

TazeTSchnitzel 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

OpenAI would probably still have some kind of claim against a company that did that.

	▲	Symbiote 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No, at least not in the EU. That's the meaning of this decision.

▲

7bit 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"It will harm consumers"

Ah yes, chosing a name that transports openness and transparency when the opposite is the case, and complaining about not being able to register that name as a trademark, which will cause financial harm the said company -- but somehow there's still people to spin it the other way around so it harms consumers now, therefore it was a bad decision.

That's the definition of anti-consumer behavior

▲

Legend2440 5 hours ago | parent [-]

You just don't like OpenAI and are for anything that hurts them, without thinking through the consequences.

What will harm consumers is the scammy "OpenAI" chat app that I can now legally upload to app stores in the EU, in hopes of tricking people into thinking it's a genuine app.

	▲	saghm an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It seems pretty dubious that there are a lot of people who know the name of the company behind ChatGPT but not able to recognize that the name of their chat isn't "OpenAI chat"
	▲	7bit 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I use OpenAI. I just am against anti-consumer behaviour