This feels like a slight misstep that could result in consumer harm. The name is incredibly vague, without doubt, but to claim "OpenAI" doesn't evoke a very specific company at this point in the minds of consumers seems myopic.

▲

thewebguyd 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Whether it evokes a specific company now isn't relevant to the ruling. The trademark was refused, and this was a challenge to that initial refusal, and the refusal was upheld.

I somewhat agree with the EU here. It's far too generic, "Open" and "AI." To grant the trademark would mean any AI product that actually IS open, or open source, etc. cannot say they are "Open AI" which IMO would be a problem.

Where I might disagree with the ruling is spacing vs. no spacing. I'd have granted them the trademark on specifically "openai" as a single word but not "Open AI". Let's them defend their name against anyone else calling themselves "OpenAI" but not any other product advertising itself as "Open" "AI".

	▲	joshuat 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I completely agree with your last point. They shouldn't have ownership of "Open" in relation to "AI" broadly speaking, but their company name "OpenAI" should be protected. Entirely possible, seeming more likely, that I didn't have enough background information on the short article.

▲

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

The EU shouldn't be held to bad decisions made by the US trademark office.

▲

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

Ah yes, classic max capitalism take