OpenAI has released a detailed timeline containing emails, texts, and legal documents that challenge Elon Musk’s claims about opposing the organization’s transition to a for-profit model. According to OpenAI, Musk, who co-founded the company, had actually pushed for this change in 2017 and sought to become its CEO.
This timeline stands in stark contrast to Musk’s recent injunction aimed at preventing OpenAI’s for-profit shift, highlighting inconsistencies in his stance.
In 2017, OpenAI and Musk agreed that becoming a for-profit entity was necessary to advance its mission and leverage the public interest generated by its AI defeating professional Dota 2 players.
Musk proposed a new board structure that would give him initial control of the company, a move the organization’s leadership opposed. These disagreements ultimately led to Musk leaving OpenAI’s board in 2018. Years later, in 2023, Musk founded xAI, a competing AI venture.
Elon Musk
This latest blog from OpenAI appears to be part of an ongoing effort to refute Musk’s criticisms and legal challenges. Earlier this year, Musk filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging that its dealings with Microsoft violated its non-profit origins.
The lawsuit was dropped after OpenAI released a blog showcasing communications that indicated Musk had previously sought to either merge OpenAI with Tesla or take control as CEO. The new blog expands on this material, further underlining the contradictions in Musk’s position.
By sharing this timeline, OpenAI seeks to clarify the motivations and events that led to its transformation into a for-profit company while countering Musk’s narrative. The documents suggest that Musk’s criticisms of OpenAI’s structure and partnerships stand at odds with his own earlier proposals and actions.
OpenAI’s leadership appears intent on demonstrating that its current path aligns with the long-term vision for the organization, contrary to Musk’s claims.
This publication not only serves to defend OpenAI but also sheds light on the broader power struggles and competing ambitions within the tech industry. It underscores the influence of personal and business interests on the strategic direction of a high-profile AI organization and illustrates how foundational disagreements can shape the trajectory of innovative ventures.
