First, applicant argues that the mark is not merely descriptive because consumers will not immediately understand what the underlying wording “generative pre-trained transformer” means. The trademark examining attorney is not convinced. The previously and presently attached Internet evidence demonstrates the extensive and pervasive use in applicant’s software industry of the acronym “GPT” in connection with software that features similar AI technology with ask and answer functions based on pre-trained data sets; the fact that consumers may not know the underlying words of the acronym does not alter the fact that relevant purchasers are adapted to recognizing that the term “GPT” is commonly used in connection with software to identify a particular type of software that features this AI ask and answer technology. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    343 months ago

    Wow, talk about malicious intent. Trying to trademark the name of the technology after it gets traction. Way to screw the whole AI community over.

    • @MTK
      link
      English
      14
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      BuT wE ArE oPeNaI, oPeN!!