OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) - Elon Musk's attorneys took on with OpenAI in court Tuesday as a federal judge weighed the billionaire's ask for a court order that would block the ChatGPT maker from transforming itself to a for-profit business.
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said it was a "stretch" for Musk to claim he will be irreparably damaged if she does not step in to stop OpenAI from moving on with its shift from a not-for-profit research laboratory to a for-profit corporation.
But the judge likewise raised issues about OpenAI and its relationship with service partner Microsoft and said she would not stop the case from transferring to trial as quickly as next year so a jury can decide.
"It is possible that what Mr. Musk is saying is real. We ´ ll discover. He ´ ll sit on the stand," she said.
Musk, an early OpenAI financier and board member, took legal action against the expert system company in 2015, initially in a California state court and later in federal court, alleging it had betrayed its founding aims as a nonprofit research study lab benefiting the public excellent. Musk had actually invested about $45 million in the start-up from its founding until 2018, his attorney said Tuesday.
Musk intensified the legal conflict late last year, including new claims and accuseds and asking for a court order that would stop OpenAI ´ s prepares to transform itself into a for-profit company more . Musk also added his own AI company, xAI, as a plaintiff.
Also targeted by Musk's claim is OpenAI's close company partner Microsoft and tech business owner Reid Hoffman, a former OpenAI board member who also sits on Microsoft's board.
Gonzalez Rogers said she has a high bar for authorizing the kind of preliminary injunction that Musk wants but hasn't yet ruled on the demand. She did state she had "significant concerns" with 2 individuals linked to Microsoft on OpenAI's board - Hoffman and longtime Microsoft executive Deanna Templeton, who was a "non-voting observer."
"So you want me to believe that she was sitting there listening to all the discussions and not telling any person? What would the point be for her to sit there and listen to everybody, if not to communicate what she was listening? There would be no point for her to be there, which is why she in fact needs to not exist," she said.
Hoffman, a co-founder of LinkedIn, has actually been on Microsoft ´ s board given that shortly after the tech huge purchased the job networking site. He stepped down from OpenAI's board in 2023 to avoid disputes with his AI startup, Inflection.
Templeton, who Musk likewise called 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 sought more stability on the board. But months later on, she was dropped from the OpenAI board as U.S. antitrust enforcers were revealing issues about such arrangements on business boards.
The judge has actually dealt with a number of tech industry cases consisting of Apple's battle with Epic Games, though she said Tuesday that Musk's case is "absolutely nothing like" that a person. That case was also 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 originally set for January however was postponed after Musk's lawyer Marc Toberoff said his home was ruined in the Pacific Palisades wildfire.
Musk, who did not participate in the hearing, has actually declared in the claim that the companies are breaking the terms of his fundamental contributions to the charity. Judge Gonzalez Rogers called it a "stretch" to claim "irreversible harm" to Musk, and called the case "billionaires vs. billionaires." She questioned why Musk invested 10s of millions in OpenAI without a written contract. Toberoff said it was because the relationship in between Altman and Musk at the time was "constructed on trust" and the 2 were very close.
"That is just a lot of cash" to invest "on a handshake," the judge said.
OpenAI has actually said Musk ´ s requested court order would "incapacitate OpenAI ´ s business"and mission to the benefit of Musk and his own AI business and is based upon "improbable" legal claims.
At the heart of the disagreement is a 2017 internal power battle at the recently established startup that caused Altman ending up being OpenAI ´ s CEO
. Emails revealed by OpenAI reveal Musk had actually also looked for to be CEO and grew annoyed after 2 other OpenAI co-founders said he would hold too much power as a significant shareholder and oke.zone primary executive if the start-up succeeded in its objective to attain better-than-human AI referred to as synthetic general intelligence, or AGI. Musk has actually long voiced issues about how sophisticated types of AI might threaten humanity.
Altman eventually was successful in becoming CEO and has remained so except for a period in 2023 when he was fired and after that renewed days later after the board that ousted him was changed.
OpenAI has looked for to show Musk ´ s early support for the idea of making OpenAI a for-profit service so it might raise money for oke.zone the hardware and computer system power that AI requires.
Musk is not the only one difficult OpenAI's for-profit shift. Facebook and Instagram moms and dad Meta Platforms has asked California's attorney general to block it, and the office of Delaware's attorney general of the United States has said it is evaluating the conversion.
It was not clear Tuesday when the case might go to trial. Musk's lawyers initially said they would be all set by June after some back-and-forth with the two sides the judge showed it most likely will not be up until June 2026 at the earliest, but likely early 2027.
O'Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.
-------