Confusion converting BNF to regular expression
There are two ways of interpreting 'the first rule can be represented with a regular expression'; you should review this 'mark scheme' to determine which applies.  One possibility is that the first rule is being treated as defining a language over its own terminals and non-terminals, without ever expanding the non-terminals.  I.e, think of treating the tokens 'title', 'name', and 'endtitle' as single characters of the 'language' of 'fullname' (along with the space-char).  Then it is easy to see that that is a regular language - there are only four strings in it!

The other possibility is what you assumed, i.e that non-terminals are to be expanded.  In this case your observation that 'name' is recursive is misplaced.  The issue is not whether the set of productions for that non-terminal is regular, the issue is whether the set of strings generated from that non-terminal is regular.  For 'name' the answer is yes: The set of strings generated from 'name' is seen, with a little thought, to be simply a sequence of one or more 'word'-s separated by spaces, for which a regular expression is easy to construct [given a regular expression for 'word', of course].  So yes, in this case 'fullname' generates a regular language.

[P.S. Note: Your 'word' is missing a production for a single 'char']