4 ms·

The board of the non-profit doesn't answer to Microsoft etc. The investors own stakes in the for-profit subsidiary.

• kelnos 3y ago
  MS may not have any legal sway over the non-profit, but I wouldn't be surprised that in most cases they'd at least be consulted or given a heads-up on something like this, since it affects the for-profit bits of the org as well.
  • himaraya 3y ago
    OpenAI's corporate structure doesn't fall under "most cases"—I assume the board wanted to demonstrate independence from investors.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    • swalkergibson 3y ago
      And now I expect that we see this "board" dissolved. Frankly, as it should. If you are going to take $10B from another organization and you nuke the CEO during market hours and then later it turns out that it was just an ordinary disagreement, then you should answer for that action. On a Friday, no less. This is actually the kind of thing that can sink MSFT's apparent "first mover" advantage in the eyes of big money. OpenAI is now fractured, and whatever work they were going to be doing on tech is now going to be devoted to figuring out WTF to do with this mess the board just created all by themselves for no apparent reason.
      • davorak 3y ago
        > And now I expect that we see this "board" dissolved. The board has the power to dissolve itself, I am sure there(edit typo) are legal mechanisms for illegal acts, I think the IRS can revoke 501(c)(3) status but not dissolve, not sure if there are other mechanisms.