Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MisterManuscript t1_jdawa9m wrote

Feels like the authors are trying to piggyback on the pre-existing fame of Scale-Invariant Feature Transform. Out of all other names that could have been chosen, why try to override an existing name?

Addendum: if you're lucky, Google just might cut you some slack. If not, then expect their lawyers to come at you with a cease-and-desist.

Addendeum 2: from a deleted reply from one of the authors/person from Cerebras asking why Google might come after them with a cease-and-desist: SIFT's patent is owned by Google. They may consider trademark violation, or something similar.

16

tdgros t1_jdbu6w7 wrote

the SIFT patent expired in March, 2020. It's included in openCV now (it used to be in a "non free" extension of openCV)

14

MisterManuscript t1_jdbuih4 wrote

I stand corrected regarding the patent. The naming conflict, on the other hand, is here to stay.

9

Armanoth t1_jdc3lyf wrote

Yeah, whenever there is papers that try to redefine/takeover existing well known acronyms, i just get the sense that the goal is publicity through controversy.

I dont believe its just a coincidence, especially not when its an acronym so prominent. I mean who tries to coin a term without doing a basic Google search, let alone pick an acronym that is so well-known in the same field.

4