Musk Says He’ll Drop $97 Billion OpenAI Bid If Company Stays Nonprofit

Forbes - Feb 13th, 2025

Elon Musk plans to withdraw his $97.4 billion offer to acquire the nonprofit governing OpenAI unless the organization abandons its transition to a for-profit model. This development amplifies the ongoing conflict between Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who dismissed Musk’s proposal. Musk, speaking at the World Governments Summit, criticized OpenAI's shift from its nonprofit roots, accusing it of erasing its foundational mission. Altman countered by asserting OpenAI is not for sale and criticized Musk’s actions as attempts to hinder the company’s progress.

The conflict stems from Musk's dissatisfaction with OpenAI straying from its initial nonprofit goals to benefit humanity, a sentiment echoed when he co-founded the organization in 2015. Musk previously accused OpenAI of becoming a closed-source subsidiary of Microsoft, which invested heavily in the company. Although Musk dropped an earlier lawsuit, he revived it, alleging breaches in the founding contract. OpenAI defends its strategy, emphasizing its mission to develop safe AI beneficial to all humanity. The outcome of this feud could impact AI development and set precedents for nonprofit tech organizations considering for-profit transitions.

Elon Musk Microsoft Open Ai Sam Altman Nonprofit To For Profit Ai Development Legal Dispute

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a generally accurate and timely account of the ongoing conflict between Elon Musk and OpenAI. It covers key aspects of the story, such as Musk's bid and the legal disputes, with a good level of detail and credible sources. However, it could benefit from improved balance by incorporating more perspectives and greater transparency in explaining the basis of its claims. The story's clarity and readability are adequate, though some technical terms could be simplified for a broader audience. Overall, the article effectively engages with a topic of significant public interest and has the potential to influence discussions on AI technology and corporate governance.

Accuracy

The story accurately reports on Elon Musk's bid to purchase OpenAI and the conditions surrounding it. The claim that Musk will drop his $97.4 billion bid if OpenAI ceases its conversion to a for-profit entity is well-supported by sources. However, the article could benefit from more precise details regarding the timeline of Musk's legal actions and the specifics of OpenAI's restructuring plan. The financial involvement of Microsoft and Musk's historical role in co-founding OpenAI are accurately depicted, aligning with known facts.

Balance

The article presents viewpoints from both Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, providing a balanced view of the ongoing feud. However, it slightly leans towards Musk's perspective by emphasizing his concerns and actions more prominently than those of Altman. Including more detailed responses from OpenAI or independent experts could enhance the balance.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and concise, effectively communicating the main points of the story. However, the structure could be improved to enhance the logical flow, particularly in explaining the timeline of events. Some technical terms, such as 'closed-source de facto subsidiary,' may require further clarification for general readers.

Source quality

The article references credible sources, including statements from Musk and Altman, and mentions reputable outlets like Bloomberg. The inclusion of direct quotes and context from these sources adds to the reliability of the reporting. However, additional independent verification from third-party experts or organizations would further bolster the article's credibility.

Transparency

The article provides a basic level of transparency by citing direct quotes and mentioning sources like Bloomberg. However, it lacks detailed context about the methodology behind Musk's bid and the internal workings of OpenAI's restructuring. Greater transparency regarding the basis of certain claims and potential conflicts of interest would improve the article's transparency.