Sam Altman Defends the Company Against "Conspiracies." Is Elon Musk Behind It?

Nathan Calvin, general counsel for the nonprofit organization Encode, experienced an unexpected incident late last month. While visiting family in Washington, he received a call from someone trying to serve legal documents at his apartment. Two days later, a sheriff’s deputy knocked on the door with a subpoena from OpenAI. Nathan Calvin, who joined Encode in 2024 after graduating from Stanford Law School, was shocked. The subpoena relates to the lawsuits between Elon Musk and Sam Altman, in which Encode filed an amicus brief supporting Musk’s arguments. It requested documents concerning Musk, Encode, and Mark Zuckerberg, whom Musk had tried to involve in a takeover of OpenAI. Calvin said that no such documents exist.

OpenAI’s Paranoid Attitude Toward Critics

OpenAI is attacking opponents of its transition to a for-profit company. Its lawyers suggest that these groups are funded by Musk or Zuckerberg. Representatives of an OpenAI-affiliated super PAC speak of a force slowing AI progress. Ann O’Leary, an attorney for OpenAI, emphasized funding transparency, alluding to billionaires such as Dustin Moskovitz and Pierre Omidyar, who are investors in rival Anthropic. Groups such as Encode claim that OpenAI sees conspiracies everywhere, trapped in a paranoid bubble because of its rivalry with Meta and Musk. Calvin added that OpenAI finds it difficult to believe that Encode is simply genuinely concerned about AI safety.

History of the Dispute With Elon

OpenAI was founded in 2015 as a nonprofit laboratory because of the risks posed by AI. In 2023, Sam Altman lobbied for regulation, warning of potential harm. Rumman Chowdhury called him the darling of the Biden administration. The transition to a for-profit entity announced last year prompted criticism that it would prioritize profits over safety. Musk, a co-founder, sued OpenAI in March after launching xAI in 2023 and called Altman "Scam Altman" (a fraudster). OpenAI responded with a countersuit, accusing Musk of harassment and of an unsuccessful $97 billion (CZK 2.19 trillion) takeover attempt. Both cases are proceeding in California.

Subpoenas for Nonprofit Organizations

Advocacy groups such as the San Francisco Foundation, Latino Prosperity, and Encode sent open letters to the California attorney general opposing the transition. The Coalition for AI Nonprofit Integrity (CANI) helped draft a law in March that was quickly repealed. At a June meeting, OpenAI accused the groups of being funded by competitors. Catherine Bracy called it insulting and paranoid. OpenAI focused on CANI: it requested meetings, searched the social media accounts of its president, Jeffrey Gardner (an independent attorney from New York with no political history), and filed a complaint suggesting that CANI was a front for Musk because Gardner lived at Tesla Place, LLC. The LLC’s owners explained that the name honors Nikola Tesla, not Musk. The commission dismissed the complaint. CANI’s founder said that they operate anonymously because they fear retaliation and have no connection to Musk.

The Goals and Influence of Billionaires

OpenAI mentioned Encode because it shared a lobbyist with CANI and issued a subpoena seeking information about ties to Musk, Meta, and funders, as well as documents related to Senate Bill 53. Encode, founded in 2020 by Sneha Revanur, accepted money from the Future of Life Institute (where Musk is an adviser), but Revanur said that she has no contact with Musk. OpenAI also subpoenaed LASST, founded by Tyler Whitmer, who left his job to pursue more meaningful work; Whitmer denied any ties to Musk. Whitmer called the leak of Encode’s subpoena to Politico a nasty move.

Fighting an "Enormous Force"

OpenAI joined the super PAC Leading the Future, which raised $100 million (about CZK 2.26 billion) from donors such as Andreessen Horowitz and Greg Brockman to fight regulation. The PAC, the brainchild of Chris Lehane, targets the "enormous force" of effective altruists (EA), who see AI as an existential risk. Dustin Moskovitz invested millions in RAND and think tanks; his Open Philanthropy gave RAND $15 million (about CZK 339 million). Pierre Omidyar pledged $30 million (about CZK 678 million) for responsible AI development and supported 17 California bills. Both invest in Anthropic but claim that this does not influence policy. An Open Philanthropy spokesperson accused OpenAI of buying its way out of regulation.

Consequences for Critics

LASST and Encode have opposed Musk and Meta: Encode filed an FTC complaint against xAI, while LASST criticized its structure. Whitmer is more concerned about xAI than OpenAI. Bracy sees the accusations as a strategy to portray Musk as the villain. Omidyar Network stopped signing letters because of the appearance of a conflict of interest and removed its list of funded groups. CANI has been inactive since April; its spokesperson Becky Warren left. Encode is fighting in court, but Calvin acknowledged that this complicates its work opposing a congressional moratorium on state AI regulation.

Source: sfstandard.com