6 ms·
OpenAI loses trademark dispute at EU court
- zkmon 3mo agoSomeone finally asks some sensible questions, about hijacking of the term "open".
- Chu4eeno 3mo agoI thought you were joking, but that seemingly was the argument.
- slibhb 3mo agoThe 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.
- seanhunter 3mo agoTrademark law isn't about what "everyone already knows". It's about whether a given mark meets the criteria for legal protection in a give context. So if say an foss ML project described what they do as "open AI" the company known as OpenAI would have a right to defend the mark. This is saying they could not.
- slibhb 3mo ago> So if say an foss ML project described what they do as "open AI" the company known as OpenAI would have a right to defend the mark. This is saying they could not. Well if that's all that's at stake here, it seems very reasonable.
- sardukardboard 3mo agoEveryone on HN knows what OpenAI is, but there are tons of people who use ChatGPT and either don’t know OpenAI or don’t know the distinction between OpenAI (the company) and OpenAI (the conjunction of two words)
- mbreese 3mo agoThe linguistic gymnastics required when talking about OpenAI vs ChatGPT and Anthropic vs Claude is difficult when you're giving talk about them. At least Google vs Gemini is a little clearer. I mean, I get the rationale Company vs. Product, but most people know the product. As in "I used ChatGPT". But if you ask who OpenAI is, they'll have no clue. ChatGPT is in someways nicer... because their models are GPT-5.3, GPT-5.4, etc... But when you're trying to explain that the Anthropic models are called "Opus" or "Sonnet" or "Haiku" or "Fable", but you use them in "Claude", it gets confusing quickly.
- saghm 3mo ago> But when you're trying to explain that the Anthropic models are called "Opus" or "Sonnet" or "Haiku" or "Fable", but you use them in "Claude", it gets confusing quickly. "Why is your French coworker helping you write literature? I thought you worked in software"
- csh0 3mo agoI literally had a non technical family member ask me last week about “AI”. He began the conversation by saying: “so as far as I know there’s two kinds of ai, open ai and closed ai…” This speaks to your point, the people are confused.
- saghm 3mo agoI mean, he's not wrong! As long as you use lowercase letters for "open", of course
- saghm 3mo agoI mentioned this thread to my wife, and she told me that I was the only person she had ever heard mention the name "OpenAI", and she wouldn't have any clue who they were if she saw their name somewhere if I hadn't told her in the past.
- nottorp 3mo ago> everyone already knows what OpenAI is If it has Open in the name it's something to do with open source and "AI" right? :)
- wongarsu 3mo agoIn the EU "well known marks" are protected even without registration, and block conflicting trademark applications As such "everyone knows them" isn't a reason to allow a registration. It would just mean that blocking the trademark has no practical effect
- sandeepkd 3mo agoIf 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).
- ant6n 3mo agoI 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.
- tremon 3mo agoYes, 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.
- joshuat 3mo agoPreventing companies named [adjective]+[product/service provided] doesn't seem sustainable.
- Retric 3mo agoCompanies 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.
- zkmon 3mo agoThey didn't have "open" or "free" as prefix.
- lukan 3mo agoBut apple still goes after real apple producers, who are older than apple. https://www.popsci.com/technology/apple-swiss-trademark/ https://www.popsci.com/technology/apple-swiss-trademark/ Something is wrong, when this is happening.
- yorwba 3mo agoYou link is incorrectly paraphrasing this Wired article https://www.wired.com/story/apple-vs-apples-trademark-battle/ https://www.wired.com/story/apple-vs-apples-trademark-battle... by claiming that Apple sued Swiss farmers, even though Apple sued the Institute of Intellectual Property instead. Apple won the case a month after publication of that article https://bvger.weblaw.ch/pdf/B-4493-2022_2023-07-26_c897bf22-1587-4f0f-9233-4255eaefad7d.pdf https://bvger.weblaw.ch/pdf/B-4493-2022_2023-07-26_c897bf22-... and the Swiss Fruit Union continues to use their apple logo (which looks completely different from any of the apple images Apple has trademarked) https://www.swissfruit.ch https://www.swissfruit.ch
- saghm 3mo agoThe nouns also aren't just generic terms for the type of products they're making. OpenApple wouldn't sound confusing in the same way for a laptop and phone manufacturer as it would for a company producing apples in a non-open way.
- ChrisMarshallNY 3mo agoI seem to remember the company behind either Monster Cables, or Monster energy drinks, going after anyone that used the word “monster,” even in casual context.
- vitally3643 3mo agoIt was Monster Cables who, blessedly, are nearly irrelevant nowadays. Apparently they tried to pivot into online gambling a few years ago.
- lrae 3mo agoI mean, it might also be Monster Cables, but Monster Energy is still doing it :). https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/article/monster-energy-company-heads-trademark-bullies-top-10-list-not-all-it-seems https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/article/monster-energy-... https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/gods-and-monsters-started-monster-trademark-fight-with-monster-energy https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/gods-and-monsters-started... https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-berkshire-46369442 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-berkshire-46369442 https://www.thegamer.com/monster-energy-goes-after-glowstick-entertainment-for-using-the-word-monster/ https://www.thegamer.com/monster-energy-goes-after-glowstick... https://www.koreaboo.com/news/yg-entertainment-wins-trademark-case-baby-monster-energy-singapore-court/ https://www.koreaboo.com/news/yg-entertainment-wins-trademar... https://www.gamesradar.com/monster-energy-has-even-gone-after-pokemon-and-monster-hunter-for-daring-to-use-the-word-monster/ https://www.gamesradar.com/monster-energy-has-even-gone-afte... and many more.
- ButlerianJihad 3mo agoActually I have grabbed a couple of USB-C Monster-branded cables at the hardware store, and they work great as replacement charging cables for my devices (Chromebook and Pixel phoned) for rapid charging at 6 feet rather than 3.
- HDBaseT 3mo agoThey aren't bad cables, they just are over priced. Decent warranty though.
- paroleofficer 3mo agoOpen source charity suddenly becoming capitalistic not going as planned
- TSiege 3mo agoThis 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”
- jmole 3mo agoThis 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”.
- TazeTSchnitzel 3mo agoOpenAI would probably still have some kind of claim against a company that did that.
- Symbiote 3mo agoNo, at least not in the EU. That's the meaning of this decision.
- VorpalWay 3mo agoWell, 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 3mo agoPlenty 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.
- literalAardvark 3mo agoIn the US
- Legend2440 3mo agoMany of these companies have EU trademarks as well.
- 3mo ago
- gregman1 3mo agoTouché
- jameson 3mo ago> The EUIPO found that the word "open" would be understood by the relevant public as meaning freely accessible, while the combination with "AI" (artificial intelligence) would be interpreted as referring to products based on openly accessible artificial intelligence. > for certain software and information technology goods and services, the term is purely descriptive and therefore lacks the distinctiveness required for trademark protection edit: add the latter statement
- yorwba 3mo agoMore 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."
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- Ekaros 3mo agoI think there is most likely set of adjectives that would fall under same reasoning. GreenAI or FreeAI likely would be also be refused. On other hand RedAI or BlueAI might very well pass. It is not entirely unreasonable decision if you consider if the terms would be used in regular conversations on AI.
- DaiPlusPlus 3mo ago> RedAI I suppose that could be a generic term for any AI used as an mock adversarial or sparring-partner role, like how "red team" is today. > BlueAI Would refer to an LLM/agent rained to simulate clinical depression... ...at which point I would ask why we're creating things that will know only pain and suffering? Are we the baddies now?
- mococa 3mo ago
- miroljub 3mo agoThey should just rename it to ClosedAI. It would be more honest to their customers and better show who they are and what they stand for.
- joshuat 3mo agoThis 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.
- Ensorceled 3mo agoThe EU shouldn't be held to bad decisions made by the US trademark office.
- 7bit 3mo agoAh yes, classic max capitalism take
- thewebguyd 3mo agoWhether 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 3mo agoI 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.
- ktallett 3mo agoThey should have to change their name to not misell their product.
- kzrdude 3mo agoChatGPT is a household name. And OpenAi is actually not, people outside tech don't necessarily know it.
- joshuat 3mo agoBut people actively searching for AI products who are perhaps a little less technically inclined might. And if they stumble upon a platform that by all accounts seems to be affiliated with OpenAI, that could be problematic, especially with the level of trust people seem to be comfortable handing to LLMs.
- ginko 3mo agoIf I search for "Open AI" on google right now the first search results are openai.com, chatgpt.com and the OpenAI wikipedia page. None of which are open AI.
- wongarsu 3mo agoBut that's on OpenAI for selecting that company name. EU trademark law hasn't changed, this was always going to be a problematic trademark if challenged They still have the trademark on their logo
- advisedwang 3mo agoBeing well known is not part of determining if a trademark is valid
- ssl-3 3mo agoIt is, though: https://guidelines.euipo.europa.eu/2319054/2227105/trade-mark-guidelines/4-2-4-1-well-known-marks https://guidelines.euipo.europa.eu/2319054/2227105/trade-mar...
- advisedwang 3mo agoThat appears to be saying you cannot make a trademark of something that is well known to be used by someone else, which is very different from needing the new trademark you are trying to register to be well known.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- skeledrew 3mo agoThe only problem I see here is the name doesn't reflect the reality. Time to put something in place that tells them to rebrand and continuously charges them for fraudulent misrepresentation or something until they do.
- pbhjpbhj 3mo agoYour Honor, I went to Best Burger and had fries! They were neither a burger, nor best!! I demand an injunction!!!
- goobatrooba 3mo agoGood. The trademark would ultimately allow them to sue any company for claiming it provides "open AI". So only right choice to reject it.
- pbhjpbhj 3mo agoIf the company does provide open AI models, and that's the way a rival is using the term, then in EU/UK law that's not infringing. Although courts make mad decisions sometimes...
- summarity 3mo agoKey difference between the trademark systems here: in the EU system you don’t get a trademark by trading with a specific name and it then being recognized. It’s the other way around: the name must be unique, not confusing, and highly specific. It’s actually irrelevant whether a product exists or is traded at all. Having gone through the process and gotten both approvals and rejections, the line is pretty clear.
- krembo 3mo agoWeird decision, if so I wonder what would they say about other trademarks like Apple..
- sebastiennight 3mo agoApple 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%2522checkboxes%2522%253A%257B%2522bases_choice%2522%253A%257B%2522order%2522%253A0%252C%2522searchField%2522%253A%255B%2522registrationOfficeCode%2522%255D%252C%2522values%2522%253A%255B%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522FR%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Atrue%257D%252C%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522EM%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Atrue%257D%252C%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522WO%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Atrue%257D%255D%257D%252C%2522brands_validity%2522%253A%257B%2522order%2522%253A1%252C%2522searchField%2522%253A%255B%2522expiryDate%2522%252C%2522frSubMarkDetails.frSubMark.expiryDate%2522%255D%252C%2522values%2522%253A%255B%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522applicable%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Atrue%257D%252C%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522not_applicable%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Afalse%257D%255D%257D%257D%252C%2522texts%2522%253A%257B%2522mark_name%2522%253A%257B%2522order%2522%253A3%252C%2522searchField%2522%253A%255B%2522markWordElement.keyword_lowercase%255E20%2522%252C%2522markWordElementBounded.keyword_lowercase%255E10%2522%252C%2522markWordElement.whitespace_remove%255E10%2522%252C%2522markWordElement.brands_markname%255E10%2522%252C%2522markWordElement.brands_markname_special_char_token%255E10%2522%255D%252C%2522checkedSearchField%2522%253A%255B%255D%252C%2522value%2522%253A%2522apple%2522%257D%257D%252C%2522multipleSelects%2522%253A%257B%257D%252C%2522dates%2522%253A%257B%257D%257D&displayStyle=List&filter=%257B%2522markWordElement.folding%2522%253A%2522apple%2522%252C%2522classDescriptionDetails.class%257CfrSubMarkDetails.frSubMark.goodsServicesDetails.goodsServices.classDescriptionDetails.classNumber%2522%253A%255B%252229%2522%252C%2522029%2522%255D%252C%2522markFeature%2522%253A%255B%2522Word%2522%255D%257D&nbResultsPerPage=20&order=asc&page=1&q=&searchType=advanced&sort=relevance&type=brands 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 a strange meteorobiological event where such fruit started to grow in the clouds, this would no longer be a valid trademark for someone to create, because it would be descriptive of a category of things in the real world.
- mrtnmcc 3mo agoWe had a similar result when a big U.S. defense company (Kratos) tried to take our open source project's domain name: open.space The panel ruled in our favor, that their OPENSPACE trademark is probably invalid because it is descriptive. https://domainnamewire.com/2026/04/08/u-s-defense-contractor-tries-reverse-hijacking-open-space/ https://domainnamewire.com/2026/04/08/u-s-defense-contractor...
- em-bee 3mo agobut you changed the name anyways, why?
- mrtnmcc 3mo agoThis UDRP panel only had jurisdiction over domain name disputes. They still threatened going to court over trademark and we had more important things to do. The new domain is https://ScaleRF.com/ https://ScaleRF.com/
- aziaziazi 3mo agoJust in case you didn’t notice: open.space seems inaccessible at the moment and the error page points to https://developers.cloudflare.com/support/troubleshooting/http-status-codes/cloudflare-1xxx-errors/error-1000/ https://developers.cloudflare.com/support/troubleshooting/ht... Tangentially www.openspace.ai also exists.
- jasode 3mo agoThe story about the ruling really doesn't explain why another company called OpenText that's been around since 1991 and has a valid trademark registration in EU but OpenAI would be invalid. OpenText also has its Europe headquarters in Germany: https://www.opentext.com/about/office-locations https://www.opentext.com/about/office-locations Any legal guesses as to why those 2 companies are treated differently with regards to the very generic words : "open", "text", "AI" ? EDIT add another example is Open Systems that has a office in Switzerland. https://www.open-systems.com/ https://www.open-systems.com/ The trademark registrations search results: https://www.tmdn.org/tmview/#/tmview/results?page=1&pageSize=30&criteria=C&basicSearch=Open%20Systems https://www.tmdn.org/tmview/#/tmview/results?page=1&pageSize... We can assume the OpenAI lawyers brought up these and other similar examples and the court rejected the past examples as a valid argument.
- sebastiennight 3mo agoFirst of all, can you explain what an "open text" is? Second, as far as I can find through the French IP office (INPI), OpenText (single word) is trademarked as a figurative trademark (meaning they are basically protecting the image of the logo), not a verbal trademark.[0] Which is what you typically do when you know that your trademark is too likely to be rejected (as being too descriptive), but you want to give it a semblance of protection. So, no, I wouldn't assume they have been treated better. [0] https://data.inpi.fr/search?advancedSearch=%257B%2522checkboxes%2522%253A%257B%2522bases_choice%2522%253A%257B%2522order%2522%253A0%252C%2522searchField%2522%253A%255B%2522registrationOfficeCode%2522%255D%252C%2522values%2522%253A%255B%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522FR%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Atrue%257D%252C%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522EM%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Atrue%257D%252C%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522WO%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Atrue%257D%255D%257D%252C%2522brands_validity%2522%253A%257B%2522order%2522%253A1%252C%2522searchField%2522%253A%255B%2522expiryDate%2522%252C%2522frSubMarkDetails.frSubMark.expiryDate%2522%255D%252C%2522values%2522%253A%255B%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522applicable%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Atrue%257D%252C%257B%2522value%2522%253A%2522not_applicable%2522%252C%2522checked%2522%253Afalse%257D%255D%257D%257D%252C%2522texts%2522%253A%257B%2522mark_name%2522%253A%257B%2522order%2522%253A3%252C%2522searchField%2522%253A%255B%2522markWordElement.keyword_lowercase%255E20%2522%252C%2522markWordElementBounded.keyword_lowercase%255E10%2522%252C%2522markWordElement.whitespace_remove%255E10%2522%252C%2522markWordElement.brands_markname%255E10%2522%252C%2522markWordElement.brands_markname_special_char_token%255E10%2522%255D%252C%2522checkedSearchField%2522%253A%255B%255D%252C%2522value%2522%253A%2522open%2520text%2522%257D%257D%252C%2522multipleSelects%2522%253A%257B%257D%252C%2522dates%2522%253A%257B%257D%257D&filter=%257B%257D&nbResultsPerPage=20&order=asc&page=1&q=&searchType=advanced&sort=relevance&type=brands https://data.inpi.fr/search?advancedSearch=%257B%2522checkbo...
- GuB-42 3mo agoAs much as I hate OpenAI for hijacking the term "open", and I love the idea of OpenAI losing, I am not sure if I agree with it. Trademarks are first intended to protect consumers, so that if it says Coca Cola, then the Coca Cola company made it, for the better of for the worse, but at least you know. OpenAI is already a well known name in Europe, and when I see OpenAI on a product, I expect it to be a product of that company. It doesn't mean I will want to use it, I may even want to avoid it, but I don't want it to be from someone else. By denying that trademark, anyone could call their product OpenAI, and I don't think that situation would benefit the consumer.
- Hamuko 3mo ago>OpenAI is already a well known name in Europe Are there brand awareness surveys that back that up?
- nottorp 3mo ago> Trademarks are first intended to protect consumers Huh? I thought they're intended to protect "innovation".
- GuB-42 3mo agoI think you are confusing trademarks with patents. Trademarks don't prevent you from copying anything, they only prevent you from being misleading regarding the origin.
- nottorp 3mo agoThats innovation. "innovation" is the usual justification of companies for their consumer hostile moves.
- echoangle 3mo agoI think patents are for innovation and trademarks are to make sure that people can reliably know who they’re dealing with.
- tsimionescu 3mo ago
- Dwedit 3mo agoI wonder how that trademark logic would apply to something like OpenGL.
- josefx 3mo agoAt 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.
- GuestFAUniverse 3mo agoTrump administration intervening in ... 1... 2... 3...
- siva7 3mo agogod thanks ClosedAI is still available
- wtfidunno 3mo ago[dead]
- trilogic 3mo agoThis means light green to all EU tech companies using OpenAI name in their products! Even though can´t say for sure if is good or bad for a company doing that.
- pbhjpbhj 3mo agoPassing Off still exists.
- mppm 3mo ago> OpenAI had argued that the word "open" has multiple possible meanings and that "OPENAI" is a coined term without a fixed meaning. Duh. The open in OpenAI isn't supposed to mean open. We've all been complaining about nothing.
- paulddraper 3mo agoOpen can have many meanings. Publicly accessible is one of those. What does OpenText mean? [1] They do a lot of classified work for the US government. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenText https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenText
- psychoslave 3mo agoI worked for an IT company named Open at some point, in France.
- tallytarik 3mo agoThis article is somewhat misleading. The court only ruled that "OpenAI" is descriptive. It did not rule that it can never be registered. A descriptive trademark can still be registered with evidence that the mark has become distinctive through use -- that is, that "OpenAI" is known to the general public to refer to their company, rather than simply describing a type of AI. It appears OpenAI have already made that submission separately: > The Board of Appeal also stated that, once the contested decision has become final, the proceedings will resume for the purposes of examining the applicant’s alternative claim based on Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001, relating to distinctive character acquired through use.
- worik 3mo agoYes. "Closed AI" would be a better name
- itsthecourier 3mo agoyour honor, openai means nothing, just ask elon
- MattyRad 3mo agoBummer that they didn't cite the product as being neither Open nor AI.
- darajava 3mo agoMaybe it’s not open, but how is it not AI?