Last week, Elon Musk filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging breach of contract and fiduciary duty. Musk believes that Microsoft is influencing OpenAI’s vision, which has strayed from its original goal of developing AGI for the benefit of humanity to focus more on profit. OpenAI responded by releasing a blog post containing emails between Musk and the company, revealing Musk’s desire for either a merger with Tesla or full control of OpenAI. Specifically, the blog stated:
“In late 2017, Elon and we agreed that the next step for our mission was to establish a for-profit entity. Elon sought majority equity, initial board control, and the role of CEO. However, amid these negotiations, he withheld funding. Reid Hoffman stepped in to fill the financial gap, ensuring continued operations and salary coverage.”
Additionally, OpenAI stated that they were unable to reach an agreement with Musk because granting him complete control would contradict the company’s mission and vision.
The blog post also revealed that Elon Musk wanted OpenAI to aim for a funding commitment larger than what CEO Sam Altman and co-founder Greg Brockman had planned. While the initial amount was set at $100 million, Musk pushed for OpenAI to announce a starting commitment of $1 billion.
However, the post clarifies from the outset that the company received less than $45 million from Musk and over $90 million from other donors. This indicates that the $1 billion funding commitment was unsuccessful, resulting in little to no outcome. Musk raised concerns that OpenAI was shifting from an open-source platform to a “closed-source de facto subsidiary of the largest technology company in the world: Microsoft.”
OpenAI refuted this claim by sharing an email exchange between Ilya Sutskever, co-founder and former Chief Scientist at OpenAI, and Musk. In the email, Ilya mentioned:
“As we approach the development of AI, it may be prudent to become less transparent. The ‘Open’ in OpenAI signifies that everyone should reap the benefits of AI once it’s developed, but it’s acceptable to withhold scientific details. Although sharing everything is currently the right approach, especially for recruiting purposes, this may change in the future.“
~ Ilya Sutskever, Co-founder and Former Chief Scientist at OpenAI
After revealing these details, OpenAI expressed sadness over the situation, particularly with “someone whom we’ve deeply admired—someone who inspired us to aim higher, then told us we would fail, started a competitor, and then sued us when we began making significant strides towards OpenAI’s mission without his involvement.”
The OpenAI vs. Elon Musk Debate: Assessing Fault
The main issue with the entire lawsuit is the absence of a concrete contract to rely on. The dispute is based on a few digital exchanges and oral agreements between OpenAI and Elon Musk. While it has garnered attention, there are limited legal grounds to pursue.
Former U.S. Attorney Kevin O’Brien told CNBC, “It’s certainly a good advertisement for the benefit of Elon Musk,” indicating uncertainty about the strength of the legal foundation.
There’s no clear “winner” in this situation. It appears to be a matter of competitive rivalry. Musk’s xAI wing has released its Grok AI bot to compete with ChatGPT, one of OpenAI’s flagship projects. It’s unclear if this lawsuit will give Musk the leverage he seeks.
Furthermore, with voices like AI expert Gary Marcus questioning OpenAI’s vision, it raises the question of whether the company has been true to its original ideals. This situation is just beginning to unfold, and there may be more complexities than initially apparent.
What are your thoughts on this situation? What do you believe is really happening here? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
