3 ms·
Someone finally asks some sensible questions, about hijacking of the term "open".
by zkmon 3mo ago
Someone 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.