Sam Altman’s OpenAI, the AI juggernaut behind ChatGPT, has been accused by at least seven nonprofit organizations of using aggressive legal tactics and its massive financial resources to intimidate and silence its critics.
NBC News reports that OpenAI, the world’s highest-valued AI startup, is facing allegations from at least seven nonprofit organizations claiming that the company has used overly broad subpoenas as a form of legal intimidation. The nonprofits, which have been critical of OpenAI’s ongoing efforts to restructure from a nonprofit to a for-profit public benefit corporation, say the subpoenas appear to be designed to extract private information about the company’s critics.
The subpoenas, which are part of the legal battle between OpenAI and Musk, suggest that the subpoenaed nonprofits are somehow connected to Musk. However, six of the nonprofits were not involved in the lawsuit before OpenAI brought them into it by issuing the subpoenas, and the remaining nonprofit had filed a supporting brief in the case but claims it had not engaged with Musk.
Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization uninvolved in the current lawsuit that has not yet received a subpoena, stated that OpenAI’s intent in issuing the subpoenas is clear. “This behavior is highly unusual. It’s 100% intended to intimidate,” he said, adding that it is an attempt to bully nonprofit critics, chill speech, and deter them from speaking out.
The subpoenas, four of which were reviewed by NBC News, request a wide variety of documents and materials, including all information about the organizations’ funders and donations, as well as all communications regarding Musk, Meta, and its founder Mark Zuckerberg. Critics argue that the subpoenas are hardball legal tactics that far surpass normal legal action and are often irrelevant to the ongoing Musk lawsuit.
The controversy has led to several prominent current and former employees of OpenAI publicly criticizing its actions, which is highly unusual for the tight-lipped company. Joshua Achiam, OpenAI’s head of mission alignment, expressed his concerns on social media, stating, “This doesn’t seem great.”
OpenAI Chief Strategy Officer Jason Kwon, responded to the allegations, claiming that after Musk sued OpenAI, several organizations joined in and ran campaigns backing his opposition to OpenAI’s restructure, raising transparency questions about their funding and potential coordination.
However, the nonprofits that received subpoenas span a range of causes and have all been critical of OpenAI. The San Francisco Foundation (SFF), for example, says it has never received any funding from Musk nor participated in the lawsuit. SFF helped lead a petition asking California’s attorney general to prevent OpenAI’s attempt to restructure, citing concerns about the diversion of immense charitable assets for private, corporate profit.
Legal experts have raised concerns about the breadth and aggressive nature of the subpoenas, with some suggesting that OpenAI will have to demonstrate the requests’ relevance to the ongoing litigation. There are also concerns about the potential harassment of nonparties, the chilling of speech, and the possibility of OpenAI using the subpoenas for ulterior purposes.
Read more at NBC News here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship.
Read the full article here