I’m using OpenAI API’s in my app.
Can I use GPT in my product name, for example ‘Name GPT’ , not ChatGPT or OpenAI, just the term “GPT”. To be specific Cook GPT, or Doctor GPT or Sofia GPT?
No.
Full-stop.
Absolutely not.
This is not allowed.
1 Like
As far as I can tell, the abbreviation GPT stands for Generative Pretrained Transformer, and was in use in general language long before OpenAI shipped any products.
Looking at the branding guidelines, it seems to say that you can’t use the names of their models other than as referents – e g, you can say “Widget powered by GPT-4” but you can’t say “GPT-4Widget.” Note that the `-4 seems important, because it indicates a specific OpenAI product, rather than a general purpose transformer.
Same thing for other specific products of OpenAI: their brand guidelines seem to claim “OpenAI,” “GPT-3,” “GPT-3.5,” “GPT-4” and “ChatGPT.”
So, given this interpretation, what specific reference are you using to say that using the GPT abbreviation for “generative pretrained transformer” goes against the OpenAI guidelines?
1 Like
Not quite, Generative Pretrained Transformer is the correct term for GPT.
Already fixed it on re-reading; thanks for the note!
The main issue is that OpenAI are looking to get GPT as a trademark, like IBM JVC, ICI, etc, etc. So it’s a bad idea to to use it in that manner, some do and just ignore the brand guidelines, but that will ultimately lead to issues down the road.
1 Like
You’re welcome to try it and find out.
But I would direct you to this,
1 Like
Interesting that that sentence is the only mention of treating GPT as a brand name – the entirety of the document otherwise mention the specific models.
Thanks for the pointer!
Apparently OpenAI has been able to register “GPT” as a trademark in EU [0], while their application in US is still under review [1].
[0] https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/#details/trademarks/018836652
[1] https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=97733259&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch
Funny that OpenAI wasn’t even the first to call their models GPT.
In their “GPT-1” paper (in 2018) they haven’t named it like that. They also changed the title of the paper only later from initially " Improving language understanding with unsupervised learning" to “Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training” where they used just “Generative Pre-Training” or “pre-trained model”. No occurence of GPT or similar. [1]
Only in the BERT paper, the Google authors first used Generative Pre-trained Transformer (OpenAI GPT) to describe OpenAI’s model. [2]
[1] https://cdn.openai.com/research-covers/language-unsupervised/language_understanding_paper.pdf
[2] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.04805.pdf
OpenAI kind of gets a raw deal in the USPTO denial decision. All the evidence of “general use” or generic common use in the industry is basically others packing their products with the name of OpenAI’s GPT or themselves being based on OpenAI services… by the time the trademark office finally got around to Googling.
1 Like
The USPTO denial is an interesting read though. They also go into “does the word transformer exist?”, “does the word generative mean something?”. “Here’s some random .ai domains we Googled”.
If I want my product to be named UXE, and file for that word mark now, and nobody has taken it, does it matter what it stands for, or that “unexploded xenomorphic encoding” is all words that could be used for something?
Would GPT mean anything at all if OpenAI didn’t exist?
GPT doesn’t really roll off the tongue well and many confuse it with GTP … ChatGPT isn’t a great name in my opinion either, but they can’t really change it easily now and walk back… I’m not sure what I would call it, but I did like how Google used Bert, Ernie, etc… like early days of web we had Archie and Veronica, etc…
1 Like
Interesting discussion above, mainly because I had “GPT” wrong. In economics it stands for “General Purpose Technology”. My assumption was the name was a nod to that concept. But now I’ve learned it stands for something else entirely “Generative Pre-trained Transformers”. I now can’t help but wonder if whomever named ChatGPT saw their opportunity to cover both bases and took it. As for the original question, I’d advise against using GPT in your product or company name. I have a feeling that while they might not win after the many years of costly litigation, it won’t be worth your while.
1 Like
Thanks all for all the valuable responses. The conclusion is I’ll not use the term GPT though it may mean General Physical Therapy, or Gas Pressure Test or even Generative Pre-trained Transformer for that matter just for practicality reasons just as @jackhott said it it is not “worth your while”.
But thanks all!
2 Likes