Elon Musk’s legal case against OpenAI is hilariously bad

[Introversion]

In case anyone was unaware, Musk is suing OpenAI for “breach of contract”.

Loading…

www.theverge.com

…

There’s no agreement there — maybe it is true that OpenAI’s byzantine corporate structure that involves a nonprofit owning a for-profit corporation subverts the ideals laid out in this document, but Musk cannot sue over that since it is not a contract.

The breach of contract claim goes on to reference an email from Sam Altman to Elon Musk, which says the technology OpenAI develops would be used for “the good of the world,” to which Musk replied, “Agree on all.”

I asked a few lawyer friends if any of that looked like a contract, and most of them just made puzzled faces. This tracks with Musk’s increasingly fuzzy understanding of how contracts work; just yesterday a judge told lawyers for X that its breach of contract case against the Centers for Combating Digital Hate involved “one of the most vapid extensions of law I’ve ever heard.”

This entire complaint is more like a 1L exam question than a real lawsuit — to the extent that the second cause of action is something called “promissory estoppel,” a concept that sets the hearts of law professors aflame and which comes up in the real world approximately never. The important thing to know is that the richest person in the world is now trying to tell a court that he somehow detrimentally relied upon the promises of a nonprofit when he donated millions of dollars to it with no written contract. This is, at the very least, extremely funny.

From there, the complaint continues to fade into a wet fart — there are some catchall state claims and then a final desperate cause of action for “accounting,” which has two elements under California law, one of which is that OpenAI has to owe Musk money. This is an unusual expectation for donations to a nonprofit, to say the least.

Anyway, my guess is that this case will continue to be a gold mine for law schools around the country because it is almost a certainty that OpenAI’s response will be another 1L favorite: a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for “failure to state a claim.”

 

[Friendly Frog]

From an article posted in another thread:

Musk has sought a court ruling that would compel OpenAI to make its research and technology available to the public and prevent the startup from using its assets, including GPT-4, for financial gains of Microsoft or any individual.

Which IMO is what Musk is mostly after. His own hastily-erected company is way, way behind and Musk wants in and since he failed to get OpenAI when he still had the chance, he probably still think he should be the one who owns it and calls the shots.

But honestly, I am happy enough to see two people I don't like wasting energy with fighting between themselves. Maybe Musk should just challenge Altman to a boxing duel. Because that worked so well with his Facebook counterpart (AKA that Other Rich Jerk) right?