The legal filing alleges that OpenAI’s shift from a nonprofit to a for-profit entity contradicts its original mission. It describes this transition as involving “flagrant breaches of its charitable mission and rampant self-dealing,” per The New York Post. Musk further contends that OpenAI, now a dominant player in artificial intelligence, is operating as a “Frankenstein” organization, strategically leveraging various corporate forms to benefit Microsoft and Altman financially.
Musk’s concerns are echoed by the legal filing, which calls for an immediate halt to OpenAI’s operations under its current structure. The complaint highlights Microsoft’s multi-billion-dollar investment in OpenAI, which Musk’s legal team suggests has transformed the company into a profit-driven enterprise. “Whatever leeway OpenAI might have been due under antitrust law as a purported charity it chose to forego when it subordinated itself to Microsoft for profit,” the filing stated.
Read more: Indian News Agency Sues OpenAI, Accuses ChatGPT of Using Content Without Permission
The injunction request was filed on behalf of Musk, his AI venture xAI, and Shivon Zilis, a former OpenAI board member and current executive at Neuralink, a brain-chip company co-founded by Musk. Zilis, who shares three children with Musk, is also a party to the lawsuit.
OpenAI responded strongly to Musk’s legal move, describing it as “utterly without merit” and accusing him of rehashing arguments from previous legal challenges. According to The New York Post, Musk has a history with OpenAI, having initially been a significant backer before parting ways following a disagreement with Altman over the company’s direction.
This legal filing follows Musk’s earlier lawsuit against OpenAI in March, which he withdrew before refiling in August.
Source: The New York Post
Featured News
Google’s Privacy Class Action Lawsuit Moves Forward After Court Rejects Dismissal Request
Jan 8, 2025 by
CPI
Pilgrim’s Pride Finalizes $100 Million Settlement with Farmers in Wage Suppression Case
Jan 8, 2025 by
CPI
First-of-Its-Kind Ruling: EU Court Ruling Holds European Commission Accountable for GDPR Violation
Jan 8, 2025 by
CPI
EU Rebukes Meta CEO’s Claims of Censorship Under Digital Services Act
Jan 8, 2025 by
CPI
Banco BPM Files Antitrust Complaint Against UniCredit’s Takeover Bid
Jan 8, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand