Centauri
Established Member
- Impact
- 556
UDRP is just low hanging fruit.I really look forward to the outcome of the Chatgpt.com UDRP, whoever regged it could see a huge lottery ticket payday or the administrative fleecing of a $M+ domain.
The pending "GPT" trademark is for the specific use in the AI field.@bmugford You know what is funny, you argue a lot about trademarks etc. but did you know that "DataCube" is trademarked heavily? I'm sure you do. I still remember you saying you would sell it. I guess we all should just develop our GPT domains then for something unrelated to AI etc. and just wait for a nice buyer to come along lol in fact 13 registered TMs for DataCube.
Show attachment 237079
Nope, it is very relevant, it is kinda hypocritical telling people indirectly not to register GPT domains, because of TM issues, while you yourself do it with DataCube.The pending "GPT" trademark is for the specific use in the AI field.
Other uses for "GPT" would be irrelevant, just like your post is.
OpenAi would obviously have no claim if you were using the term for "Georgia Physical Therapy".
Brad
You got me dude. I have only been using the domain in commerce for like 14 years in order to sell the domain.I guess we all should just develop our GPT domains then for something unrelated to AI etc. and just wait for a nice buyer to come along lol in fact 13 registered TMs for DataCube.
I won't hold it against you that you don't know what you are talking about.Nope, it is very relevant, it is kinda hypocritical telling people indirectly not to register GPT domains, because of TM issues, while you yourself do it with DataCube.
Cheers,I won't hold it against you that you don't know what you are talking about.
Cheers.
Brad
People can invest in what they want to invest in. It's their money.Nope, it is very relevant, it is kinda hypocritical telling people indirectly not to register GPT domains, because of TM issues...
I think it is debatable, but set that aside for a second.
The in usage date is stated and was allowed to be stated (and proven) as 2018. The filing date means nothing.Yet, they filed as Bloomberg GPT, when the Bloomberg portion is already trademark.
This would be a redundant filing if it was just about the "Bloomberg" portion of the mark.
Like many other companies filing Term+GPT filings, the "GPT" is relevant to their IP ventures.
Hence, the growing number of term+GPT filings.
Open AI's filing is Feb 2023, the timeline for approvals is longer than ever. Every day that passes by, more corporations file similar marks and these corps will submit many oppositions to the Trademark Office.
Genericness is a key element to trademark approval and maintenance. A TM can be too generic for protection, or become too generic to maintain prior protection.
I'm betting by the time ChatGPT mark reaches opposition, it'll be too generic to receive anything but the narrowest protection related to OpenAI.
Thanks for letting us all know!Casual domain trader. Casual reader of NP. First time poster as I thought this may be of interest.
From the Twitter thread of davidmichaels on 5 May (since I can't post links and just link to it):
"If you are a domain name investor or an OpenAI subscriber, Let me know if you are interested in filing a class action lawsuit against OpenAI and BrandShield."
"Brandshield's letters to users of domains comprising the word GPT have devalued the resale value of GPT domain names. That devaluation represents damages that owners of these domains have sustained. Damages under the Lanham Act and the Sherman Act are also available."
Casual domain trader. Casual reader of NP. First time poster as I thought this may be of interest.
From the Twitter thread of davidmichaels on 5 May (since I can't post links and just link to it):
"If you are a domain name investor or an OpenAI subscriber, Let me know if you are interested in filing a class action lawsuit against OpenAI and BrandShield."
"Brandshield's letters to users of domains comprising the word GPT have devalued the resale value of GPT domain names. That devaluation represents damages that owners of these domains have sustained. Damages under the Lanham Act and the Sherman Act are also available."