OpenAI, Meta Platforms and Silicon Valley: OpenAI for the Public Good or OpenAI? Musk v. Altman’s Case for a Non-Profit

The day after the acquisition was done, Musk said he was alarmed to see the company’s valuation of $20 billion. De facto is what it is. He wrote that he provided most of the funding for the A and B rounds. This is a switch and a bait.

The blogs highlights that Musk wanted to put him in the CEO position and gain majority control of the company. He said he needed to accumulate $80b for a city on Mars and that he didn’t care about equity. Musk had previously suggested that Openai would spin off into Musk’s company. When the negotiations fell apart because OpenAI’s cofounders rejected his proposal (Brockman and Sutskever admitted they had fears of a power struggle), Musk resigned from the company.

Some of the messages published by OpenAI were previously outlined in court filings that Musk made in his ongoing suit against OpenAI and its partner Microsoft. Musk filed a lawsuit in March accusing OpenAI of straying from its original purpose of developing Artificial Intelligence for the public good.

There are two people trying to represent the public interests in Musk v. Altman. Although we would also urge your office to take direct action, we believe that Mr. Musk and Ms. Zilis are qualified and well positioned to represent the interests of Californians in this matter. They are the people who created and operations of OpenAI and have been on its Board for some time, so they have a great grasp of what Openai was meant to be and how it is deviating from its charitable mission.

As a California company that builds Generative AI technology, Meta Platforms, Inc. (“Meta”) is deeply concerned about OpenAI’s attempt to shed the non-profit status under which it was founded in order to establish a for-profit entity. The nature and timing of any transfer of assets from Open AI’s non-profit entity to other entities should be reviewed by you. It is possible that a proliferation of start-up ventures that are considered charitable until they are potentially profitable could happen if Openai is not held accountable for its choice to form as a non-profit. The people of California have interests in stopping the behavior. All for-profit activities of OpenAI and its related entities should be paused to protect investors and consumers alike.

Open Artificial Intelligence decided to go private in order to pursue this project because of the lack of a clear path in the public sector as well as the successes of other ambitious projects in private industry. OpenAI had previously believed a 501(c)(3) would be the most effective vehicle to direct the development of safe and broadly beneficial AGI while remaining free of profit incentives.

This Corporation shall be a nonprofit corporation organized exclusively for charitable and/or educational purposes within the meaning of section 501(c){3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the corresponding provision of any future United States Internal Revenue law. The specific purpose of this corporation is to provide funding for research, development and distribution of technology related to artificial intelligence… The corporation is not organized for the private gain of any person… No part of the net income or assets of this corporation shall be used for the benefit of any person other than the directors, officers and members of the corporation.