OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) - Elon Musk's attorneys took on with OpenAI in court Tuesday as a federal judge weighed the billionaire's demand for a court order that would obstruct 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 harmed if she does not intervene to stop OpenAI from progressing with its transition from a not-for-profit research study laboratory to a for-profit corporation.
But the judge also raised issues about OpenAI and its relationship with company partner Microsoft and said she would not stop the case from relocating to trial as quickly as next year so a jury can decide.
"It is plausible that what Mr. Musk is saying holds true. We ´ ll learn. He ´ ll rest on the stand," she said.
Musk, yewiki.org an early OpenAI investor and board member, sitiosecuador.com took legal action against the expert system company last year, initially in a California state court and utahsyardsale.com later in federal court, declaring it had betrayed its starting aims as a nonprofit research study laboratory benefiting the general public great. Musk had invested about $45 million in the start-up from its starting up until 2018, his lawyer said Tuesday.
Musk escalated the legal disagreement late in 2015, adding new claims and accuseds and requesting a court order that would stop OpenAI ´ s prepares to convert itself into a for-profit service more fully. Musk likewise included his own AI business, xAI, as a plaintiff.
Also targeted by Musk's claim is OpenAI's close company partner Microsoft and systemcheck-wiki.de tech business owner Reid Hoffman, a previous OpenAI board member who also rests on Microsoft's board.
Gonzalez Rogers said she has a high bar for authorizing the type of initial injunction that Musk wants however hasn't yet ruled on the demand. She did state she had "significant concerns" with 2 individuals connected to Microsoft on OpenAI's board - Hoffman and longtime Microsoft executive Deanna Templeton, who was a "non-voting observer."
"So you desire me to believe 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 everybody, if not to interact what she was listening? There would be no point for her to be there, which is why she in fact should not be there," she said.
Hoffman, a co-founder of LinkedIn, has been on Microsoft ´ s board since shortly after the tech giant bought the task networking website. He stepped down from OpenAI's board in 2023 to prevent conflicts with his AI startup, Inflection.
Templeton, drapia.org who Musk likewise named as a defendant, was included as a non-voting member of OpenAI ´ s board in the after-effects of Altman ´ s ouster after Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella looked for 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 corporate boards.
The judge has actually managed a number of tech industry cases including Apple's fight with Epic Games, though she said Tuesday that Musk's case is "nothing like" that one. That case was likewise the last time she granted 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 but was postponed after Musk's lawyer said his house was destroyed in the Pacific Palisades wildfire.
Musk, who did not go to the hearing, has declared in the claim that the companies are breaching the regards to his fundamental contributions to the charity. Judge Gonzalez Rogers called it a "stretch" to claim "irreversible damage" 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 due to the fact that the relationship in between Altman and Musk at the time was "constructed on trust" and the 2 were extremely close.
"That is simply a lot of money" to invest "on a handshake," the judge said.
OpenAI has actually said Musk ´ s asked for court order would "disable OpenAI ´ s service"and mission to the advantage of Musk and his own AI business and is based upon "far-fetched" legal claims.
At the heart of the conflict is a 2017 internal power struggle at the recently established start-up that resulted in Altman ending up being OpenAI ´ s CEO
. Emails disclosed by OpenAI show Musk had likewise sought to be CEO and grew disappointed after two other OpenAI co-founders said he would hold excessive power as a major shareholder and chief executive if the startup succeeded in its goal to attain better-than-human AI called artificial basic intelligence, or timeoftheworld.date AGI. Musk has actually long voiced issues about how sophisticated forms of AI might threaten mankind.
Altman eventually was successful in becoming CEO and has actually remained so except for a duration in 2023 when he was fired and after that renewed days later on after the board that ousted him was replaced.
OpenAI has actually sought to demonstrate Musk ´ s early support for the idea of making OpenAI a for-profit organization so it could raise money for setiathome.berkeley.edu the hardware and computer system power that AI requires.
Musk is not the only one challenging OpenAI's for-profit shift. Facebook and Instagram parent Meta Platforms has asked California's attorney general of the United States to obstruct 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 attorneys at first said they would be prepared by June after some back-and-forth with the 2 sides the judge suggested it probably won't be up until June 2026 at the earliest, however likely early 2027.
O'Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.
-------