Mengchen West Wind from Ao Fei Si
qubit | Public account qbitai
Musk filed a complaint and took Openai to court , and the technology circle exploded again.
He believes that Ultraman and Openai have blatantly violated the founding agreement and turned to profit. He also claims that GPT-4 is already counted as AGI according to the protocol standards, and requires Openai to restore open source .
The latest response from openai is also here:
According to axios news, openai executives firmly denied Musk’s quality control in internal messages to employees.
Especially the follow-up reply from Ultraman himself, admitting "This is going to be a tough year for the company" .
This (what openai is doing) will never be easy and attacks will continue to occur.
In addition to the confrontation in formal occasions, Musk and Altman also competed with each other in their own styles on the platform.
Musk has always been straightforward, and there is a battlefield wherever he goes. In a post announcing the cooperation between openai and the humanoid robot company figure, he said:
Come on over.
is a pun, referring both to this lawsuit and to the future competition between the two companies in humanoid robots.
Altman did not reply directly. Instead, he dug up a post in which he supported Musk when Tesla was controversial. Five years later, he replied:
is always with you.
He did not choose to fight head-on, but he accepted the challenge with a hint of sarcasm.
The two real owners were competing here, and they were busy watching and eating. They dug out many details and highlights from Musk's 46-page, 10,000-word indictment.
plaintiff , only Musk.
, the defendant , filled in all eight companies associated with openai, plus two executives, Altman and Brockman.
and the legal term "does 1 through 100" falsely refer to more potential defendants that are not listed...
is only missing former chief scientist ilya sutskever. Where did
ilya go?
ilya's last public speech, which was also his last public appearance, was on December 2, 2023.
Openai President Greg Brockman posted a photo of the two of them, and ilya responded with a red heart.
From now on, there will only be new progress in the super alignment project that he forwarded.
From the openai board mutiny incident in November last year to now, ilya has not given any academic lectures or accepted any interviews, and has disappeared since then.
Many people who care about the progress of science and technology, together with Musk, were most concerned about "What on earth did ilya see" .
Later, a "Where did ilya go and what was he doing" was gradually added.
Any disturbance related to openai will repeatedly remind people of ilya's absence.
Whenever news of follow-up technologies q*, gpt-4.5, and gpt-5 comes out, some people speculate "Is this what ilya saw at that time?" .
When NVIDIA's market value soared, people dug out old photos of when Lao Huang donated chips to OpenAI, and continued to wonder "Where did ilya go?" .
When any OpenAI employee such as Andrej Karpathy and Developer Community Director Logan resigned, netizens would inevitably ask:
ilya What exactly did you see? Can you tell me now?
What is even more confusing is that when sora came out, everyone ran to look for the list of contributors. In the special acknowledgments of
, as usual, listed in alphabetical order are CEO Altman, President Brockman, CTO Murati, C this o, c that o.
only does not have ilya.
More than four months have passed, and there is still no definite answer to these two questions.
...
Now that Musk has taken action, he has finally brought you more insider details. The
indictment disclosed that the relationship between openai and Microsoft may not be what they claim.
Microsoft's external statement has always been that "it is a very important partner with openai", but "Microsoft does not control openai."
The indictment records that during the openai boardroom struggle, Microsoft CEO Nadella once "bragged" that he didn't care whether openai would disappear tomorrow.
We have these talents, we have these computing power, we have these data, we have everything of openai.
We are beneath them, we are above them, we surround them.
So some netizens began to wonder whether what ilya saw was Microsoft's control of openai?
Regarding the second question about where ilya went, Musk’s intervention also brought more speculation.
ilya is not on the defendant list. Perhaps Musk confirmed that he no longer works at OpenAI, or perhaps Musk intentionally did not prosecute him.
When several Lianchuang companies were poaching people together, ilya was undecided about whether to leave Google.
Musk believed that it was his phone call that prompted ilya to make up his mind at the last moment.
Karpathy, who resigned a while ago, was poached to Tesla as the AI director when Musk launched OpenAI.
It’s hard to say whether the whole openai turmoil that started in November last year is directly related to Musk.
But the possibility is not low whether these two people will cooperate with Musk again in the future.
The indictment is the best development history of OpenAI
Let’s look at the 46-page complaint submitted by Musk. It not only states the accusations, evidence and litigation claims against OpenAI, but also discloses OpenAI’s complex corporate structure, Musk’s More details and highlights including the email exchanges with Ultraman around 2015.
good guy, a detailed supplementary material on the entire development history of openai.
Let’s look at the key points first. Musk’s accusations include five points:
, breach of contract (breach of contract)
Musk said that from the establishment of openai in 2015 to September 2020, he not only invested tens of millions of dollars, He also made important suggestions on research directions and played a key role in recruiting top talents for OpenAI.
and the reason why he did this was based on the founding agreement at that time clearly stating:
openai will develop AGI as a non-profit organization, serving human welfare rather than pursuing shareholder profits, and will remain open source and only do so under security concerns. To strike a balance, the technology will not be kept secret due to commercial patent reasons.
This agreement is documented in OpenAI’s founding agreement and years of written communications between Musk and the defendants.
The defendant violated the founding agreement in many ways, including but not limited to:
originally promised that OpenAI would develop AGI for human interests rather than private commercial interests, but ended up exclusively licensing GPT-4, which can be regarded as an early version of AGI, to Microsoft. .
originally promised that openai technology would be open source, but did not disclose the details of gpt-4 to the public, and set up a paywall to obtain commercial benefits with Microsoft.
allows Microsoft, a for-profit company, to have a seat on OpenAI's board of directors and exert undue influence and control over OpenAI's non-profit activities, including determining the degree of disclosure of OpenAI's technology and evaluating whether OpenAI reaches AGI.
Due to openai's breach of contract, Musk stated that he suffered losses exceeding the jurisdictional threshold of this court of US$35,000. The specific amount will be raised at trial.
. Promissory estoppel/breach of promise (promissory estoppel)
Musk also pointed out that in order to "induced" him to invest millions of dollars and a lot of time and resources in OpenAI over the years, the defendants had repeatedly made promises, including in writing. .
Based on the defendant's promise, he himself invested huge sums of money and resources in openai. Openai later abandoned its non-profit mission and ran counter to the promises he had received.
Musk’s demand is:
correct this injustice by executing the defendant’s promise. If it is not specifically enforced, the defendant should at least compensate the plaintiff for its lost investment and the losses of the third-party beneficiaries expected in the founding agreement. The amount is currently unknown but is well in excess of this court's jurisdictional minimum of $35,000 and will be proven at trial if necessary.
. Breach of fiduciary duty (breach of fiduciary duty)
According to California law, the defendant has a fiduciary duty to the plaintiff, including the obligation to use the plaintiff’s funding for its designated purposes. The defendant's profit-making use of the funds it provided and the intellectual property and derivative works funded thereby violated this principle and should specifically perform its contractual obligations.
. Unfair business practices (unfair business practices)
The defendant used false promises as an excuse to solicit donations from the plaintiff and others for non-original purposes, which constituted unfair competition and other unfair business practices.
Musk’s claim is that he has the right to require the defendants to return all funds obtained through such actions and/or confiscate these funds, and to estimate interest in accordance with the law, to seek to prohibit the defendants from engaging in such activities again in the future, and to require the defendants to specifically perform their obligations.
, accounting audit (accounting)
The defendant has financial information related to the funding made by the plaintiff and others to openai, as well as the use of intellectual property rights and derivative works of these funds. The plaintiff is currently unable to determine its use of assets, Distribution or distribution of benefits requires audit accounting.
In addition, there are many details worth mentioning in the indictment.
The first is openai’s complex corporate structure. Some netizens said that it was true and they did not expect that openai is actually a series of shell structures, involving "8 openai" :
Musk clearly displayed the founding time, members and other details of these companies in the indictment:
Netizens were surprised , Musk also responded, saying that this is the "enterprise version of the shell game (a magic scam)":
Netizens also immediately made memes, all of which are openai:
In the indictment, Musk also believed that, The new board of directors, hand-picked by Altman, lacks sufficient AI expertise compared with the previous board of directors and does not have the ability to "independently judge whether and when to implement AGI, and when Microsoft should be excluded according to the agreement."
There is also a slightly off-topic story.
explained in the indictment that Musk was worried about "agi falling into the wrong hands" and introduced that Musk began to worry about the dangers of AI after coming into contact with DeepMind.
Everyone is familiar with this story, but newly revealed details include that Musk was not the only one worried about the dangers of AI at the time.
At that time, another investor said after a meeting with deepmind that "the best thing he could do for mankind but did not do was to kill the founder of deepmind, Hassabis, on the spot."
...
At the end of this 10,000-word indictment, Musk's demands included that asked the court to make a judicial ruling to determine whether gpt-4 and later models are considered agi, and whether the agreement should be enforced and not with Microsoft. shared.
Some netizens said that this requirement is too difficult for judges and juries.
one more thing
Well-known openai breaking account jimmy apples (who accurately predicted the release date of sora 2 days in advance) also brought the latest news:
Before the official release of gpt-5, openai originally planned to update the model and q*.
But since it has gone to court, we can only postpone until the law approves .
He said that he can play games for the first time in a long time on weekends. The implication is that there will be no big releases in the near future.
Therefore, Musk’s move, regardless of whether he wins or loses the final lawsuit, will objectively slow down the pace of OpenAI.
internal research will not stop here.
But both other technology companies and ordinary people around the world have more time to prepare for the next generation of AI models.
Indictment: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/musk-v-altman-openai-complaint-sf.pdf
Reference link:
[1]https://www. axios.com/2024/03/01/openai-rejects-elon-musk-lawsuit-claims
[2]https://www.ft.com/content/cd6eb51a-3276-450f-87fd-97e8410db9eb
