OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) - Elon Musk's lawyers took on with OpenAI in court Tuesday as a federal judge weighed the billionaire's request for a court order that would block the ChatGPT maker from converting itself to a for-profit company.
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said it was a "stretch" for Musk to claim he will be irreparably hurt if she doesn't step in to stop OpenAI from progressing with its shift from a nonprofit lab to a for-profit corporation.
But the judge also raised concerns about OpenAI and its relationship with company partner Microsoft and said she wouldn't stop the case from moving to trial as soon as next year so a jury can decide.
"It is possible that what Mr. Musk is saying holds true. We ´ ll discover. He ´ ll sit on the stand," she said.
Musk, an early OpenAI investor and board member, took legal action against the expert system business last year, initially in a California state court and later on in federal court, declaring it had actually betrayed its founding aims as a nonprofit research study lab benefiting the general public excellent. Musk had actually invested about $45 million in the startup from its founding until 2018, his attorney said Tuesday.
Musk escalated the legal dispute late in 2015, including brand-new claims and offenders and requesting a court order that would stop OpenAI ´ s prepares to convert itself into a for-profit organization more fully. Musk also included his own AI company, xAI, as a plaintiff.
Also targeted by Musk's claim is OpenAI's close company partner Microsoft and tech entrepreneur Reid Hoffman, a previous OpenAI board member who also rests on Microsoft's board.
Gonzalez Rogers said she has a high bar for approving the kind of preliminary injunction that Musk wants however hasn't yet ruled on the request. She did state she had "substantial concerns" with 2 individuals connected to Microsoft on OpenAI's board - Hoffman and long time Microsoft executive Deanna Templeton, who was a "non-voting observer."
"So you want me to think that she was sitting there listening to all the conversations and not telling any person? What would the point be for her to sit there and listen to everyone, if not to interact what she was listening? There would be no point for her to be there, which is why she in fact must not exist," she said.
Hoffman, a co-founder of LinkedIn, has actually been on Microsoft ´ s board because soon after the tech huge bought the task networking website. He stepped down from OpenAI's board in 2023 to prevent conflicts with his AI startup, Inflection.
Templeton, who Musk also named as an accused, was added as a non-voting member of OpenAI ´ s board in the after-effects of Altman ´ s ouster after Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella looked for drapia.org more stability on the board. But months later, she was dropped from the OpenAI board as U.S. antitrust enforcers were expressing concerns about such arrangements on business boards.
The judge has actually dealt with a number of tech industry cases consisting of Apple's fight with Epic Games, though she said Tuesday that Musk's case is "absolutely nothing like" that one. That case was likewise the last time she gave a preliminary injunction, in 2020, 8 months before the case went to trial.
Then-President Barack Obama selected Gonzalez Rogers to the federal bench in 2011.
Tuesday's hearing was initially set for January but was delayed after Musk's lawyer Marc Toberoff said his home was destroyed in the Pacific Palisades wildfire.
Musk, who did not go to the hearing, has actually declared in the claim that the business are breaking the regards to his fundamental contributions to the charity. Judge Gonzalez Rogers called it a "stretch" to claim "permanent harm" to Musk, and called the case "billionaires vs. billionaires." She questioned why Musk invested tens of millions in OpenAI without a written contract. Toberoff said it was due to the fact that the between Altman and Musk at the time was "built on trust" and the two were really close.
"That is simply a great deal of money" to invest "on a handshake," the judge said.
OpenAI has said Musk ´ s requested court order would "incapacitate OpenAI ´ s organization"and objective to the advantage of Musk and his own AI company and is based upon "far-fetched" legal claims.
At the heart of the disagreement is a 2017 internal power struggle at the new start-up that caused Altman ending up being OpenAI ´ s CEO
. Emails disclosed by OpenAI reveal Musk had actually also looked for to be CEO and grew frustrated after 2 other OpenAI co-founders said he would hold excessive power as a major investor and primary executive if the startup succeeded in its objective to attain better-than-human AI called synthetic general intelligence, or AGI. Musk has actually long voiced issues about how advanced types of AI could threaten mankind.
Altman eventually prospered in ending up being CEO and has remained so other than for a duration in 2023 when he was fired and then restored days later on after the board that ousted him was changed.
OpenAI has sought to demonstrate Musk ´ s early assistance for the idea of making OpenAI a for-profit business so it might raise money for the hardware and computer power that AI needs.
Musk is not the only one difficult OpenAI's for-profit transition. Facebook and Instagram parent Meta Platforms has actually asked California's attorney general of the United States to obstruct it, and the workplace of Delaware's chief law officer has said it is evaluating the conversion.
It was unclear Tuesday when the case might go to trial. Musk's legal representatives at first said they would be ready by June after some back-and-forth with the 2 sides the judge showed it most likely will not be until June 2026 at the earliest, but likely early 2027.
O'Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.
-------