Since (quite briefly) fired him, Openai CEO Sam Altman has worked hard under the control of the company's nonprofit board. But after several efforts to prevent the move, including a lawsuit filed by OpenAI co-founder Elon Musk, the company announced Monday that it will temporarily maintain its structure.
The desire to abandon its nonprofit structure mainly stems from one thing: money. Being organized as a nonprofit means that OpenAI is not driven (at least in theory) by providing shareholders with ROI, but rather focuses on ensuring that “all humans benefit from artificial universal intelligence.” Becoming a nonprofit has also led to some complications of Openai's fundraising efforts. The company received $40 billion in funding earlier this year, mainly from SoftBank, but the money is determined by Openai completing a planned restructuring that is a for-profit entity. The funds are in trouble now.
Openai will continue to operate a commercial subsidiary, part of Altman's company. However, according to the company, it will transition from LLC to Public Welfare Company (PBC). The reason for some theorized changes is that it will make it easier for Openai to trade publicly. The non-profit committee will be a major shareholder of PBC and will continue to monitor and control the company. The shift also appears to be free from the restricted production structure that the company operates with LLC, which limits the return it can return 100 times the investor.
Basically every lap has attempted to reorganize openai into a for-profit entity, although this is obviously not always altruistic. For example, Musk appears to be mainly filing a lawsuit to prevent the reorganization as the two fell, part of their resentment against Ultraman Sam. Meta also struggled with change, although it's hard to imagine that it's at least not because the company is creating its own Chatgpt competitor and wants to hinder Openai's ability to raise funds. Other nonprofits are also questioning Openai's attempt to turn, fearing that the company will use the funds it applies to “public goods” to maximize its profits.
Given that Altman managed to successfully expel the board that tried to evacuate him because he allegedly lied to them, and now there are other members in his back pocket, it might be fair to wonder if he is really good at the nonprofit’s statement mission, or he just tried to get along well with the board of directors who were more aligned with him and the board, one or another or someone else.
