Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

dpa-international.com

11–20 of 177 posts

Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

#11
post #4

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”.

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.

Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

#13
post #4

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”.

"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

Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

#14

Open source charity suddenly becoming capitalistic not going as planned

This really is the crux of the image, and now legal, issues. OpenAI hovered up tons of money and IP under the claim that they were doing this for the public good. Now they’ve essentially admitted that was all bullshit and that they want to sell the distillation of human created knowledge and content for a fee. It’s certainly bullshit to call that bait and switch “open”

Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

#15
post #10

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.

Ah yes, classic max capitalism take

Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

#16
post #4

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”.

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.

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.

Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

#18
post #4

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”.

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.

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

Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

#19
post #10

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.

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".

Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court

#20
post #12
post #2

Someone finally asks some sensible questions, about hijacking of the term "open".

Preventing companies named [adjective]+[product/service provided] doesn't seem sustainable.

Companies can be named after random nonsense, ‘pink catfish’ could easily be the world’s #1 supplier of firearms and nobody would find it strange.

Caterpillar, Apple, Kellogg, etc really don’t have anything to do with the underlying product but neither do people’s names.

Post reply on HN