it's quite oniony that "It ruled that the combination of words was not an unusual linguistic combination in English."

all 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 25 points 3 months ago

Good. If they want that name protected, they should go back to being an open source nonprofit.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 3 months 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.

    OpenAI had argued that the word "open" has multiple possible meanings and that "OPENAI" is a coined term without a fixed meaning.

    oUr nAmE iS mEaNiNgLeSs, GiVe uS tRaDeMaRk pLs 🤡

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Wait, I thought OpenAI is open as in OpenOffice. That's dishonest from the start.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

    It was honest at the start but Elon Musk lost the battle to ensure it's a non-profit open for all of humanity. The commercial greed of Sam Altman and co corrupted the company whilst kicking out Musk and keeping the name. Musk then went and started grok as a response

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    I wonder if they will do a rebrand

  • source
  • 6 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 57 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Lol you can say "OpenAI" without infringing on Sam Altman's properties

    OpenAI had argued that the word "open" has multiple possible meanings

    Including "not open," based on their behavior.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago
    [+] -16 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Well that's stupid. It's a huge brand, a combo of words, and I'm sure there are many other companies that are like OpenRouter or whatever. Seems just petty to not grant the trademark

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment