Elon Musk sues Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and OpenAI [pdf]

> it keeps the intangible benefits it accrued by being ostensibly non-profit

but there would be no different to a for-profit entity right? i.e even for-profit entities get tax benefits if they convert their profits to intangibles

this is my thinking. Open AI non-profit gets donations, uses those donations to make a profit, converts this profit to intangibles to avoid paying taxes, and pumps these intangibles into the for-profit entity. based on your hypothesis open ai avoided taxes

but the same thing in a for-profit entity also avoids taxes, i.e for-profit entity uses investment to make a profit, converts this profit to intangibles to avoid paying taxes.

so I'm trying to understand how Open AI found a loop hole where if it went via the for-profit then it wouldn't have gotten the tax advantages it got from non-profit route

I think the public is well aware that “non profit” is yet another scam that wealthy elites take advantage of, not available in the same way to the common citizen.

TL;DR for those wondering, as I was, why Musk would have any kind of plausible claim against OpenAI, the main claim is breach of contract on the "Founding Documents" of OpenAI, Inc. (the original nonprofit funded by Musk).

> Plaintiff contributed tens of millions of dollars, provided integral advice on research directions, and played a key role in recruiting world-class talent to OpenAI, Inc. in exchange and as consideration for the Founding Agreement, namely, that: OpenAI, Inc. (a) would be a non-profit developing AGI for the benefit of humanity, not for a for-profit company seeking to maximize shareholder profits; and (b) would be open-source, balancing only countervailing safety considerations, and would not keep its technology closed and secret for proprietary commercial reasons. This Founding Agreement is memorialized in, among other places, OpenAI, Inc.’s founding Articles of Incorporation and in numerous written communications between Plaintiff and Defendants over a multi-year period [...]

> Defendants have breached the Founding Agreement in multiple separate and independent ways, including at least by: a. Licensing GPT-4, which Microsoft’s own scientists have written can “reasonably be viewed as an early (yet still incomplete) version of an artificial general intelligence (AGI) system,” exclusively to Microsoft, despite agreeing that OpenAI would develop AGI for the benefit of humanity, not for the private commercial gain of a for-profit company seeking to maximize shareholder profits, much less the largest corporation in the world. b. Failing to disclose to the public, among other things, details on GPT-4’s architecture, hardware, training method, and training computation, and further by erecting a “paywall” between the public and GPT-4, requiring per-token payment for usage, in order to advance Defendants and Microsoft’s own private commercial interests, despite agreeing that OpenAI’s technology would be open-source, balancing only countervailing safety considerations. c. [...]

And what is he suing for?

> An order requiring that Defendants continue to follow OpenAI’s longstanding practice of making AI research and technology developed at OpenAI available to the public, and

> An order prohibiting Defendants from utilizing OpenAI, Inc. or its assets for the financial benefit of the individual Defendants, Microsoft, or any other particular person or entity;

> For a judicial determination that GPT-4 constitutes Artificial General Intelligence and is thereby outside the scope of OpenAI’s license to Microsoft;

And some money, of course. And he requests a jury trial.

What benefits? What taxes?

Honestly it does not sound like anyone here knows the first thing about non-profits.

OAI did it because they want to raise capital so they can fund more towards building agi.