[cbartlett]

Blender is a registered trademark, I'm pretty sure this has nothing to do with blender. I'm not sure GPT is safe or even correct either.

[ec109685]

GPT trademark was rejected: https://www.saul.com/insights/alert/what-gpt-and-who-owns-it

[cchance]

It has a quick export to blender format is why i imagine it named that

[bhelkey]

It does interface with blender. However, Garmen can't call their watches "Apple Watches" just because they can interface with Apple products. And they certainly can't claim Apple Watch as their registered trademark like OP ("BlenderGPT®").

[para_parolu]

Bestbuy is full of equipment with Blender in name. How they do it?

[isaacimagine]

Trademark does not apply for unrelated goods.

See: https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/search/likelihood-confusion

[griomnib]

They aren’t software, Blender foundation likely has exclusive use in that domain. I’m guessing if it was litigated it would come up, but that they’d prevail.

[SubiculumCode]

And this is not even just about software in a general sense, it's literally software that creates the same product: 3d models. Absolutely asking for trouble.

[account42]

It's not just asking for troubly, it's malicious. Intentionally confusing people is not cool.

[hirako2000]

And trained on models that for a large part were made in Blender.

[ben_w]

Same way Tesco gets to be full of apples without a licence from the record company or the phone company with an attached computer division.

[staticman2]

The fact that the trademark doesn't merely describe the product is what allows for protection. That's why Apple can be trademarked for a computer product but not for a fruit, as the latter would be merely a description of the product.

[archerx]

They are not related to software or computer graphics.

[cbartlett]

Because trademarks are categorised