upvote

points

by GuB-425 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby wsng5 hours ago|
next
[-]
As explained in the judgement, being well-known is irrelevant. This is not about consumer protection, but about brand protection.

You are right that the decision has the potential to confuse consumers. However, that is on Open AI, they should have consulted trademark lawyers earlier, and should have rebranded after shifting from open AI to commercial AI.

reply
upvoteby GuB-424 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I trust the judges on that one, they know the law better than I do, obviously.

I am also not discussing about who is at fault, I agree that it is on OpenAI.

I just don't want, say, some company that is even shadier than OpenAI to launch an OpenAI branded protect with the intention to mislead people.

Maybe grant OpenAI the trademark, but do not allow them to use it on products that are not actually open, but I guess it is legally problematic.

reply
upvoteby Hamuko5 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
>OpenAI is already a well known name in Europe

Are there brand awareness surveys that back that up?

reply
upvoteby nottorp5 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
> Trademarks are first intended to protect consumers

Huh? I thought they're intended to protect "innovation".

reply
upvoteby tsimionescu4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
No, they are very much not. That's the supposed benefit of patents and/or copyright. Trademarks are for ensuring there is no consumer confusion about which company they are trading with.
reply
upvoteby GuB-424 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
I 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.

reply
upvoteby echoangle4 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I think patents are for innovation and trademarks are to make sure that people can reliably know who they’re dealing with.
reply