Trump administration intervening in ... 1... 2... 3...
OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
111–120 of 177 posts
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#112god thanks ClosedAI is still available
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
More pertinently "the term is purely descriptive and therefore lacks the distinctiveness required for trademark protection." I.e. the problem isn't that OpenAI's products don't match their description, but that trademarking it would unduly prevent others from describing their openly accessible artificial intelligence as "open AI."
>More pertinently "the term is purely descriptive and therefore lacks the distinctiveness required for trademark protection." As I wrote in my other comment, "open systems" also can be purely descriptive and yet Open Systems seems to be a valid trademark in Europe. I'm not defending OpenAI. I'm just confused that the rules for allowing trademarks for ordinary words and phrases don't look consistent at the surface lev…
> I'm just confused that the rules for allowing trademarks for ordinary words and phrases don't look consistent at the surface level
Precedence in court decisions is weighted more in some places than others. US courts, from my pedestrian observation, are all into "well there is a precedent so we'll follow that". But other countries don't necessarily do that, their courts might be more eager to disregard it and do whatever they feel is appropriate in that situation. You can see it in how OpenAI reacted "The company also cited comparable trademark registrations previously granted by the EUIPO and registrations in more than 30 other countries, including the United Kingdom and Singapore" (well precedents say this and that...)
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
The argument doesn't hinge on whether OpenAI is actually open. Rather it seems to have to do with the name being insufficiently distinguishable from a generic term ("open AI"). I think it's a bizarre ruling given that everyone already knows what OpenAI is.
If the goal of a trademark is to get recognized then its futile given OpenAI is already popular. If the goal is to prevent others from using the term which is so generic then it does makes sense to not allow the common keywords being hijacked. On a side note, the AI models from the company are not even open, one can go as far as banning it as inappropriate marketing (Product not matching the description).
I thought the trademark is to prevent costumers from accidentally buying “open AI” from some company other than openAI, while thinking they’re buying from openAI.
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#115[dead]
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
Give me a break. Apple doesn't sell apples.
Do they have a trademark on the word apple with no other context? I thought it was Apple computer, which is distinct.
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).
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#117I wonder how that trademark logic would apply to something like OpenGL.
At least the GL part isn't something that has a widely understood meaning and I don't think any of the competing APIs are generally refered to as Graphics Libraries either.
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple is a valid trademark in the "computers" category, but would not be accepted in the "food" category. Here are the 13 valid trademarks in France containing the word "apple" in the same category as fruit: https://data.inpi.fr/search?advancedSearch=%257B%2522checkbo... None of them are descriptive of the actual fruit. "Apples in the Sky" is a valid trademark only because apples in the sky do not exist. If there was…
What about "Savoury apple" ?
“Free Apples”
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Caterpillar does have a lot to do with the product. It crawls on a track and a photographer thought the track looked like a caterpillar .
Caterpillar sells way more than tracked vehicles, and very much uses CAT as its logo.
Nintendo could have named itself after playing cards, but that wouldn’t have kept up with its current business model.
Re: OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the goal of a trademark is to get recognized then its futile given OpenAI is already popular. If the goal is to prevent others from using the term which is so generic then it does makes sense to not allow the common keywords being hijacked. On a side note, the AI models from the company are not even open, one can go as far as banning it as inappropriate marketing (Product not matching the description).
I thought the trademark is to prevent costumers from accidentally buying “open AI” from some company other than openAI, while thinking they’re buying from openAI.
Yes, that is what a trademark is for, in general. In this case, the court ruled that the term "open AI" is too generic to qualify for that protection exactly because it is a purely descriptive term that could legitimately refer to any "freely available" model in common parlance.