Musk accuses OpenAI and Microsoft of anti -concurrence practices: the cause widens | OpenAI free | Chat GPT gratis | OpenAI Playground | Turtles AI

The legal cause of Elon Musk against OpenAI is further complicated with the inclusion of new defendants such as Microsoft, Reid Hoffman and Dee Templeton. The dispute revolves around the alleged removal of the non-profit mission of OpenAI and alleged anti-concurrence agreements between Openai and Microsoft.

Key points:

• Elon Musk resumes the legal cause against OpenAI, accusing the company of having betrayed its non-profit principles.
• The cause now also involves Microsoft, Reid Hoffman and Dee Templeton.
• Musk claims that OpenAI is trying to damage competition, in particular his XAI company.
• The cause denounces anti -concurrence practices, including Microsoft’s undue influence on OpenAI’s operations.

The legal battle between Elon Musk and OpenAI, who had seen a first chapter with the retreat and the subsequent reinstatement of the cause in July, is now enriched with new significant developments. A modified complaint filed in recent days has in fact expanded the list of defendants, including weight names such as Microsoft, Reid Hoffman, Dee Templeton and the Prosecutor General of California, Rob Bonta. Musk, a former founder of OpenAI, accuses the organization of having betrayed his original mission, evolving from non-profit body in a profitable structure linked in an increasingly strict way to Microsoft. The plant of the cause revolves around the complaint of anti -concurrence practices and the affirmation that OpenAI is actively trying to hinder competitors such as its own company as Ai, Xai.

OpenAI had been founded in 2015 by Musk and other entrepreneurs with the aim of developing AI technologies for the benefit of humanity, in a profit -free context. However, in 2018 Musk left the company because of divergences on his direction. With the now famous passage of OpenAI to a structure with limited profit, Musk has raised concerns about how the company is managing the funds and collaborations, in particular with Microsoft, which according to the complaint has too pervasive influence on activities of OpenAI.

In detail, Musk’s lawyers claim that OpenAI is trying to eliminate competition, through agreements with investors who would prevent Xai from accessing important resources such as the processing capacity, which Microsoft provides for OpenAI at extremely advantageous conditions. Musk believes that these agreements configure a real "de facto fusion" between the two entities, with significant legal implications. The complaint also accuses OpenAI of having violated antitrust regulations, thanks to the interference of characters such as Hoffman and Templeton. Reid Hoffman, a former member of the Board of Directors of Openai and Greylock investor, is accused of having had privileged access to confidential information through his bonds with both realities, including those relating to inflection, a start-up Ai Ai acquired by Microsoft. Similarly, Templeton, a former Microsoft vice president, is accused of facilitating the intertwining between the two companies, at the expense of the competition.

A further point raised concerns Shivon Zilis, who held roles of responsibility in Neuralink and OpenAI, who, according to the cause, would have been damaged by the exclusive management of the internal information between OpenAI and Microsoft. Zilis is described as a "injured employee" because of the disagreements with the management of OpenAI on some crucial agreements, in particular those that have allowed the company to get closer and more to a profit -oriented business model.

A curious detail that emerges from the complaint concerns the proposal of the CEO of OpenAI, Sam Altman, to launch a cryptocurrency in 2018. According to legal documents, Altman would have taken into consideration an initial offer of coins (ICO) to raise funds, but Musk He would have categorically opposed the idea, believing that he would undermine OpenAI’s credibility. Musk’s cause underlines how the evolution of society, from philanthropic body to lucrative business, not only has betrayed the initial ideals but has also negatively affected the competition, in particular on the entry of new initiatives such as its XAI.

The cause, which has extended to 107 pages, continues to emphasize that OpenAI is becoming more and more a "Microsoft subsidiary", accuses that Musk repeats several times during the trial. According to Musk’s lawyers, the transition to a business model with profit made OpenAI unable to pursue the original goal of making research on AI available for the benefit of humanity. The change of course, highlight, would have led to a centralization of resources and an exclusive in favor of Microsoft, putting the founding principles of OpenAI in the background.

For his part, OpenAI tried to reject the accusations, defining the "swagger" and unfounded cause, and reiterating that its evolution was necessary to respond to the economic and technical challenges imposed by continuous growth in the AI ​​sector. Despite the replicas by the company, the legal dispute seems destined to continue with new implications that could prove crucial for the future of the sector.

A conflict that, beyond the legal aspects, raises important questions about the management of resources and the ethical orientation of large technological companies in the field of AI.