Guy Ravine’s Open AI (with a space) owns a trademark and website that OpenAI (no space) wants. What can their lawsuits tell us about the future of AI—and who wins in Silicon Valley?
AI is not new. Open-source is not new. Putting two well known concepts together wasn’t new either because… AI has historically been open. A lot of the cutting edge research is done in public laboratories, with public funding, and is published in journals (sadly often behind paywall but still).
So the name and the concept are both unoriginal.
A lot of the popularity gained from OpenAI by using a chatbot is not new either. Relying on always larger dataset and benefiting from Moore’s law is not new either.
So I’m not standing on any side, neither this person nor the corporation.
I find that claiming to be “owning” common ideas is destructive for most.
What this show is a total lack of originality.
AI is not new. Open-source is not new. Putting two well known concepts together wasn’t new either because… AI has historically been open. A lot of the cutting edge research is done in public laboratories, with public funding, and is published in journals (sadly often behind paywall but still).
So the name and the concept are both unoriginal.
A lot of the popularity gained from OpenAI by using a chatbot is not new either. Relying on always larger dataset and benefiting from Moore’s law is not new either.
So I’m not standing on any side, neither this person nor the corporation.
I find that claiming to be “owning” common ideas is destructive for most.