<story><title>OpenAI – Application for US trademark “GPT” has failed</title><url>https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn97733259&amp;docId=FREF20240206125856&amp;linkId=1#docIndex=0&amp;page=1</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jug</author><text>Good. It&amp;#x27;s like a company in biomedicine trying to trademark &amp;quot;RNA&amp;quot;. I dislike how OpenAI are trying to hijack a term to describe a kind of language model for their products and cringed when they introduced &amp;quot;GPTs&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Making your own GPT&amp;quot;. I see what you&amp;#x27;re trying to do, OpenAI...&lt;p&gt;So, after a quick glance here -- OpenAI argued that a consumer may not realize this and what GPT means, trying to use this as a defense for hijacking the term for use in their product portfolio, but the attorney thankfully didn&amp;#x27;t find the argument very convincing due to vast and established Internet evidence. He also pointed out that it doesn&amp;#x27;t even matter if a user doesn&amp;#x27;t know specifically what the acronym &amp;quot;GPT&amp;quot; exactly means, and that it&amp;#x27;s enough that the general connection to AI and Q&amp;amp;A technology has already been established.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jacobsimon</author><text>I thought OpenAI was the first to develop and use the term GPT[1]. So maybe a more apt comparison than RNA would be PCR, which was a technique developed in a private lab and patented, even though it was published in scientific journals etc.&lt;p&gt;1. &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;cdn.openai.com&amp;#x2F;research-covers&amp;#x2F;language-unsupervised&amp;#x2F;language_understanding_paper.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;cdn.openai.com&amp;#x2F;research-covers&amp;#x2F;language-unsupervised...&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>
<story><title>OpenAI – Application for US trademark “GPT” has failed</title><url>https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn97733259&amp;docId=FREF20240206125856&amp;linkId=1#docIndex=0&amp;page=1</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jug</author><text>Good. It&amp;#x27;s like a company in biomedicine trying to trademark &amp;quot;RNA&amp;quot;. I dislike how OpenAI are trying to hijack a term to describe a kind of language model for their products and cringed when they introduced &amp;quot;GPTs&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Making your own GPT&amp;quot;. I see what you&amp;#x27;re trying to do, OpenAI...&lt;p&gt;So, after a quick glance here -- OpenAI argued that a consumer may not realize this and what GPT means, trying to use this as a defense for hijacking the term for use in their product portfolio, but the attorney thankfully didn&amp;#x27;t find the argument very convincing due to vast and established Internet evidence. He also pointed out that it doesn&amp;#x27;t even matter if a user doesn&amp;#x27;t know specifically what the acronym &amp;quot;GPT&amp;quot; exactly means, and that it&amp;#x27;s enough that the general connection to AI and Q&amp;amp;A technology has already been established.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>larodi</author><text>Next they try to copyright CHAT perhaps. Indeed very irritating.</text></comment>