In The latest development of a continuous struggle on the future orientation of Openai – and potentially the future of artificial intelligence itself – adolescents of eminent personalities urgently urgently urge California and Delaware to block the controversial plan of Openai to convert from its unique non -profit structure to a for -profit society.
In a letter made public on April 23, signatories, including “AI Godfather” Geoffrey Hinton, the legal professor of Harvard Lawrence Lessig, and several former OpenAi researchers argue that this decision represents a fundamental betrayal of the founding mission of Openai.
“The proposed restructuring would eliminate essential guarantees, by effectively relying the control and benefits of what could be the most powerful technology ever created for a for -profit entity with legal tasks to prioritize shareholders’ yields,” write the authors of the letter. It then landed that Openai faces immense pressure on the other side: not to implement the restructuring by the end of the year could cost the company $ 20 billion and a collection of future funds.
Openai was founded in 2015 as a non -profit organism, its declared mission being to ensure that the general artificial intelligence (AGI) “benefits all humanity” rather than advancing the “private gain of any person”. AG, which Optai defines as systems outperforming humans to the most economically precious work, has been considered potentially changing the world but also clear risks, in particular if they were only controlled by a for -profit business. In 2019, believing that they should attract external investments to build act, OpenAi leaders created a “for -profit” subsidiary controlled by the original non -profit organization – a hybrid that has enabled the company to take more than 60 billion dollars of capital over the years to become one of the most precious startups in history. CEO Sam Altman himself told Congress in 2023 that this structure “guarantees that it remains focused on [its] Long -term mission. “”
Then, in December, Openai proposed to dismantle this unique arrangement, transforming his arm with mature purposes into a company of public benefits, which would take control of the operations and affairs of Openai. The original non -profit organization, while abandoning direct control, would become – having an important capital in the new company – a massively endowed base; He would hire his own management to finance and pursue separate charitable work in fields such as science and education. OPENAI says that the new arrangement would allow them to “lift the necessary capital with conventional terms like the others in this space”. Indeed, the need for such terms already seems to be cooked in recent transactions: investors of the last round of OPENAI funds, finalized in March, can withdraw half this amount if Openai is not restructured by the end of this year.
“Our board of directors has been very clear: our non -profit organization will be reinforced and any modification of our existing structure would be at the service to guarantee that the wider public can benefit from the AI. Our for -profit organization will be a public service company, similar to several other AI laboratories such as Anthropic – where some of these former employees work now – and XAI, except that they do not support a non -profit organization, “said an Openai spokesperson. “This structure will continue to guarantee that, as the for -profit purpose succeeds and develops, the same goes for the non -profit organization, which allows us to carry out the mission.”
Under the restructuring, the members of the board of directors should always legally consider the OpenAi foundation mission – although it would be demoted, having to be weighed against the profits. “The non -profit organization has the power to essentially close the company if it thinks that it departs from [OpenAI’s] assignment. Consider it as an evolutionary switch, ”Stuart Russell told Time. Russell is one of the signatories of the letter and a computer teacher from UC Berkeley, who co-wrote the standard manual in the field. “Basically, they offer to deactivate this change out of evolution,” he said.
The fact that Openai’s competitors are for profit is also the point, explains Sunny Gandhi, vice-president of political affairs of the youth defense group, encoding justice and one of the signatories of the letter. “It’s a bit like asking a non-profit organization for conservation why they cannot convert to a forestry business simply because there are other forest companies,” he says. “I think it would be great if Xai and Anthropic were also non-profit, but they are not,” he adds. If Openai wants to prioritize competitiveness on its original mission, Gandhi says “this is the problem that their original structure was trying to prevent”.
The targeting of the open letter from the Attorney General Rob Bonta from California and Kathy Jennings de Delaware is strategic. In March, Elon Musk lost his candidacy for an immediate preliminary injunction which would block the conversion of Openai, but the decision has greatly turned on the doubtful legal of Musk standing– or interest in the case – not the inherent legality of conversion. The judge indicated the Musk’s argument that the for -profit quarter of work raped the OpenAi charter is worthy of a new consideration, accelerating the trial this fall. Unlike Musk, however, California and Delare prosecutors have a clear legal interest in the case.
The Office of the Attorney General of California, Rob Bota, will already investigate Openai’s plans, and the general prosecutor of Delaware, Kathy Jennings, previously reported that she intended to examine any restructuring. None of the two responded to the request for TIME comments on the letter specifically. But the way they act can establish a precedent, signaling whether corporate governance structures designed to preserve the ideals of a company can resist the financial gravity of the gold rush of AI, or will end up curling under its weight.
