![](https://images1.caifuzhongwen.com/images/attachement/jpg/site1/20250208/08002780efb72911525f0a.jpg)
加利福尼亞州奧克蘭(美聯(lián)社)——周二,埃隆·馬斯克的律師與OpenAI對簿公堂,聯(lián)邦法官權(quán)衡了這位億萬富翁提出的請求,即要求法院下令阻止這家ChatGPT制造商轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闋I利性企業(yè)。
美國地區(qū)法官伊馮娜·岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯(Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers)表示,馬斯克聲稱,如果她未介入阻止OpenAI從非營利性研究實驗室轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闋I利性企業(yè),他將遭受不可挽回的損害,岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯稱這種說法“言過其實”。
但法官也對OpenAI及其與商業(yè)伙伴微軟(Microsoft)的關(guān)系表示擔憂,并表示她不會阻止此案最快在明年進入庭審階段,以便陪審團做出決定。
“馬斯克先生所言非虛。我們會查明真相。他將會出庭作證。"她說。
作為OpenAI的早期投資者和董事會成員,馬斯克去年對這家人工智能公司提起了訴訟,起初是在加利福尼亞州法院,隨后轉(zhuǎn)至聯(lián)邦法院,指控該公司背離了其作為非營利性研究實驗室、旨在造福大眾的創(chuàng)始宗旨。馬斯克的律師周二表示,從這家初創(chuàng)公司成立到2018年,馬斯克向其投資了約4500萬美元。
去年年底,馬斯克將法律糾紛升級,增加了新訴訟請求和被告,并要求法院下令全面阻止 OpenAI 轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闋I利性企業(yè)的計劃。馬斯克還將自己的人工智能公司xAI列為原告。
馬斯克的訴訟對象還包括OpenAI的親密商業(yè)伙伴微軟和科技企業(yè)家雷德·霍夫曼(Reid Hoffman),后者曾是OpenAI董事會成員,目前也是微軟董事會成員。
岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯表示,她對批準馬斯克所要求的那種初步禁令有著很高的標準,但尚未就該請求作出裁決。她確實表示自己對OpenAI董事會中與微軟存在關(guān)聯(lián)的兩位成員有“重大擔憂”——霍夫曼和長期擔任微軟高管的迪安娜·鄧普頓(Deanna Templeton),后者是“無投票權(quán)的觀察員”。
“所以你想讓我相信她坐在那里聽了所有討論,卻沒有告訴任何人?如果不是為了傳播自己所聽到的內(nèi)容,那她坐在那里聽大家討論又有什么意義呢?她其實根本沒必要在場,所以她實際上是不應(yīng)該出現(xiàn)在那里的。”她說。
霍夫曼是領(lǐng)英(LinkedIn)的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人之一,自從這家科技巨頭收購這家求職網(wǎng)站后不久,他就進入了微軟董事會。他于2023年退出OpenAI董事會,以避免與自己的人工智能初創(chuàng)公司Inflection發(fā)生沖突。
在微軟首席執(zhí)行官薩提亞·納德拉(Satya Nadella)尋求董事會更加穩(wěn)定的局面,以及奧特曼(Altman)下臺后,鄧普頓被任命為OpenAI董事會的無投票權(quán)成員。馬斯克也將鄧普頓列為被告。但數(shù)月之后,由于美國反壟斷執(zhí)法機構(gòu)對公司董事會此類安排表示擔憂,她被OpenAI董事會除名。
這名法官處理過許多科技行業(yè)案件,包括蘋果(Apple)與Epic Games的訴訟,不過她周二表示,馬斯克的案件與那起案件“存在顯著差異”。那起案件也是她最后一次下達初步禁令,那是在2020年,距離案件開庭還有8個月時間。
2011年,時任美國總統(tǒng)奧巴馬任命岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯為聯(lián)邦法官。
周二的聽證會原定于1月舉行,但因馬斯克的律師馬克·托伯洛夫(Marc Toberoff)稱其住所在太平洋帕利塞德野火中被毀而推遲。
馬斯克本人并未出席聽證會,他在訴訟中聲稱這些公司違背了他向該慈善機構(gòu)提供初始捐款的相關(guān)條款。岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯法官稱,馬斯克聲稱自己遭受“不可挽回的傷害”的說法“言過其實”,并稱此案是“億萬富翁訴億萬富翁”。她質(zhì)疑馬斯克為何在沒有書面合同的情況下向 OpenAI 投資數(shù)千萬美元。托伯洛夫稱,這是因為當時馬斯克與奧特曼的關(guān)系“建立在信任基礎(chǔ)上”,兩人關(guān)系非常密切。
法官說:“僅憑一次握手就投入如此巨額的資金?!?/p>
OpenAI 表示,馬斯克所要求的法院禁令將“削弱OpenAI的業(yè)務(wù)”及其使命,而這對馬斯克及其人工智能公司有利,而且這一禁令請求是基于“言過其實”的法律主張。
這場爭議的核心源于2017年這家剛剛起步的初創(chuàng)公司的內(nèi)部權(quán)力斗爭,這場斗爭導致奧特曼成為OpenAI的首席執(zhí)行官。
OpenAI披露的電子郵件顯示,馬斯克也曾尋求擔任首席執(zhí)行官,但由于另外兩名OpenAI聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人表示,如果這家初創(chuàng)公司成功實現(xiàn)超越人類的人工智能(即通用人工智能,AGI)的目標,作為大股東兼首席執(zhí)行官的馬斯克將會擁有過大的權(quán)力,因此他感到沮喪。長期以來,馬斯克一直對先進人工智能可能給人類帶來威脅表示擔憂。
奧特曼最終成功出任首席執(zhí)行官,并一直擔任這一職務(wù),僅在2023年遭遇了一段短暫的解雇風波,但幾天后,隨著罷免他的董事會成員被替換,他又重新奪回了這一職位。
OpenAI 試圖證明馬斯克在早期是支持OpenAI轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闋I利性企業(yè)的這一構(gòu)想的,這樣它就能夠為人工智能所需的硬件和算力籌集資金。
馬斯克并非唯一一個對OpenAI向營利性企業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)型提出質(zhì)疑的人。臉書(Facebook)和Instagram的母公司Meta已要求加州總檢察長阻止這一轉(zhuǎn)型,特拉華州總檢察長辦公室也表示正在審查這一轉(zhuǎn)型。
截至周二,尚不清楚此案何時開庭審理。馬斯克的律師最初表示,他們將在6月份之前做好準備,但經(jīng)過雙方反復溝通,法官表示審理最早也要到 2026 年 6 月,甚至可能到 2027 年初。(財富中文網(wǎng))
譯者:中慧言-王芳
加利福尼亞州奧克蘭(美聯(lián)社)——周二,埃隆·馬斯克的律師與OpenAI對簿公堂,聯(lián)邦法官權(quán)衡了這位億萬富翁提出的請求,即要求法院下令阻止這家ChatGPT制造商轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闋I利性企業(yè)。
美國地區(qū)法官伊馮娜·岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯(Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers)表示,馬斯克聲稱,如果她未介入阻止OpenAI從非營利性研究實驗室轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闋I利性企業(yè),他將遭受不可挽回的損害,岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯稱這種說法“言過其實”。
但法官也對OpenAI及其與商業(yè)伙伴微軟(Microsoft)的關(guān)系表示擔憂,并表示她不會阻止此案最快在明年進入庭審階段,以便陪審團做出決定。
“馬斯克先生所言非虛。我們會查明真相。他將會出庭作證。"她說。
作為OpenAI的早期投資者和董事會成員,馬斯克去年對這家人工智能公司提起了訴訟,起初是在加利福尼亞州法院,隨后轉(zhuǎn)至聯(lián)邦法院,指控該公司背離了其作為非營利性研究實驗室、旨在造福大眾的創(chuàng)始宗旨。馬斯克的律師周二表示,從這家初創(chuàng)公司成立到2018年,馬斯克向其投資了約4500萬美元。
去年年底,馬斯克將法律糾紛升級,增加了新訴訟請求和被告,并要求法院下令全面阻止 OpenAI 轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闋I利性企業(yè)的計劃。馬斯克還將自己的人工智能公司xAI列為原告。
馬斯克的訴訟對象還包括OpenAI的親密商業(yè)伙伴微軟和科技企業(yè)家雷德·霍夫曼(Reid Hoffman),后者曾是OpenAI董事會成員,目前也是微軟董事會成員。
岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯表示,她對批準馬斯克所要求的那種初步禁令有著很高的標準,但尚未就該請求作出裁決。她確實表示自己對OpenAI董事會中與微軟存在關(guān)聯(lián)的兩位成員有“重大擔憂”——霍夫曼和長期擔任微軟高管的迪安娜·鄧普頓(Deanna Templeton),后者是“無投票權(quán)的觀察員”。
“所以你想讓我相信她坐在那里聽了所有討論,卻沒有告訴任何人?如果不是為了傳播自己所聽到的內(nèi)容,那她坐在那里聽大家討論又有什么意義呢?她其實根本沒必要在場,所以她實際上是不應(yīng)該出現(xiàn)在那里的?!彼f。
霍夫曼是領(lǐng)英(LinkedIn)的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人之一,自從這家科技巨頭收購這家求職網(wǎng)站后不久,他就進入了微軟董事會。他于2023年退出OpenAI董事會,以避免與自己的人工智能初創(chuàng)公司Inflection發(fā)生沖突。
在微軟首席執(zhí)行官薩提亞·納德拉(Satya Nadella)尋求董事會更加穩(wěn)定的局面,以及奧特曼(Altman)下臺后,鄧普頓被任命為OpenAI董事會的無投票權(quán)成員。馬斯克也將鄧普頓列為被告。但數(shù)月之后,由于美國反壟斷執(zhí)法機構(gòu)對公司董事會此類安排表示擔憂,她被OpenAI董事會除名。
這名法官處理過許多科技行業(yè)案件,包括蘋果(Apple)與Epic Games的訴訟,不過她周二表示,馬斯克的案件與那起案件“存在顯著差異”。那起案件也是她最后一次下達初步禁令,那是在2020年,距離案件開庭還有8個月時間。
2011年,時任美國總統(tǒng)奧巴馬任命岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯為聯(lián)邦法官。
周二的聽證會原定于1月舉行,但因馬斯克的律師馬克·托伯洛夫(Marc Toberoff)稱其住所在太平洋帕利塞德野火中被毀而推遲。
馬斯克本人并未出席聽證會,他在訴訟中聲稱這些公司違背了他向該慈善機構(gòu)提供初始捐款的相關(guān)條款。岡薩雷斯·羅杰斯法官稱,馬斯克聲稱自己遭受“不可挽回的傷害”的說法“言過其實”,并稱此案是“億萬富翁訴億萬富翁”。她質(zhì)疑馬斯克為何在沒有書面合同的情況下向 OpenAI 投資數(shù)千萬美元。托伯洛夫稱,這是因為當時馬斯克與奧特曼的關(guān)系“建立在信任基礎(chǔ)上”,兩人關(guān)系非常密切。
法官說:“僅憑一次握手就投入如此巨額的資金?!?/p>
OpenAI 表示,馬斯克所要求的法院禁令將“削弱OpenAI的業(yè)務(wù)”及其使命,而這對馬斯克及其人工智能公司有利,而且這一禁令請求是基于“言過其實”的法律主張。
這場爭議的核心源于2017年這家剛剛起步的初創(chuàng)公司的內(nèi)部權(quán)力斗爭,這場斗爭導致奧特曼成為OpenAI的首席執(zhí)行官。
OpenAI披露的電子郵件顯示,馬斯克也曾尋求擔任首席執(zhí)行官,但由于另外兩名OpenAI聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人表示,如果這家初創(chuàng)公司成功實現(xiàn)超越人類的人工智能(即通用人工智能,AGI)的目標,作為大股東兼首席執(zhí)行官的馬斯克將會擁有過大的權(quán)力,因此他感到沮喪。長期以來,馬斯克一直對先進人工智能可能給人類帶來威脅表示擔憂。
奧特曼最終成功出任首席執(zhí)行官,并一直擔任這一職務(wù),僅在2023年遭遇了一段短暫的解雇風波,但幾天后,隨著罷免他的董事會成員被替換,他又重新奪回了這一職位。
OpenAI 試圖證明馬斯克在早期是支持OpenAI轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闋I利性企業(yè)的這一構(gòu)想的,這樣它就能夠為人工智能所需的硬件和算力籌集資金。
馬斯克并非唯一一個對OpenAI向營利性企業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)型提出質(zhì)疑的人。臉書(Facebook)和Instagram的母公司Meta已要求加州總檢察長阻止這一轉(zhuǎn)型,特拉華州總檢察長辦公室也表示正在審查這一轉(zhuǎn)型。
截至周二,尚不清楚此案何時開庭審理。馬斯克的律師最初表示,他們將在6月份之前做好準備,但經(jīng)過雙方反復溝通,法官表示審理最早也要到 2026 年 6 月,甚至可能到 2027 年初。(財富中文網(wǎng))
譯者:中慧言-王芳
OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — Elon Musk’s lawyers faced off with OpenAI in court Tuesday as a federal judge weighed the billionaire’s request for a court order that would block the ChatGPT maker from converting itself to a for-profit company.
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said it was a “stretch” for Musk to claim he will be irreparably harmed if she doesn’t intervene to stop OpenAI from moving forward with its transition from a nonprofit research laboratory to a for-profit corporation.
But the judge also raised concerns about OpenAI and its relationship with business partner Microsoft and said she wouldn’t stop the case from moving to trial as soon as next year so a jury can decide.
“It is plausible that what Mr. Musk is saying is true. We’ll find out. He’ll sit on the stand,” she said.
Musk, an early OpenAI investor and board member, sued the artificial intelligence company last year, first in a California state court and later in federal court, alleging it had betrayed its founding aims as a nonprofit research lab benefiting the public good. Musk had invested about $45 million in the startup from its founding until 2018, his lawyer said Tuesday.
Musk escalated the legal dispute late last year, adding new claims and defendants and asking for a court order that would stop OpenAI’s plans to convert itself into a for-profit business more fully. Musk also added his own AI company, xAI, as a plaintiff.
Also targeted by Musk’s lawsuit is OpenAI’s close business partner Microsoft and tech entrepreneur Reid Hoffman, a former OpenAI board member who also sits on Microsoft’s board.
Gonzalez Rogers said she has a high bar for approving the kind of preliminary injunction that Musk wants but hasn’t yet ruled on the request. She did say she had “significant concerns” with two people connected to Microsoft on OpenAI’s board — Hoffman and longtime Microsoft executive Deanna Templeton, who was a “non-voting observer.”
“So you want me to believe that she was sitting there listening to all the discussions and not telling anybody? What would the point be for her to sit there and listen to everybody, if not to communicate what she was listening? There would be no point for her to be there, which is why she actually should not be there,” she said.
Hoffman, a co-founder of LinkedIn, has been on Microsoft’s board since shortly after the tech giant bought the job networking site. He stepped down from OpenAI’s board in 2023 to avoid conflicts with his AI startup, Inflection.
Templeton, who Musk also named as a defendant, was added as a non-voting member of OpenAI’s board in the aftermath of Altman’s ouster after Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella sought more stability on the board. But months later, she was dropped from the OpenAI board as U.S. antitrust enforcers were expressing concerns about such arrangements on corporate boards.
The judge has handled a number of tech industry cases including Apple’s fight with Epic Games, though she said Tuesday that Musk’s case is “nothing like” that one. That case was also the last time she granted a preliminary injunction, in 2020, eight months before the case went to trial.
Then-President Barack Obama appointed Gonzalez Rogers to the federal bench in 2011.
Tuesday’s hearing was originally set for January but was postponed after Musk’s attorney Marc Toberoff said his house was destroyed in the Pacific Palisades wildfire.
Musk, who did not attend the hearing, has alleged in the lawsuit that the companies are violating the terms of his foundational contributions to the charity. Judge Gonzalez Rogers called it a “stretch” to claim “irreparable harm” to Musk, and called the case “billionaires vs. billionaires.” She questioned why Musk invested tens of millions in OpenAI without a written contract. Toberoff said it was because the relationship between Altman and Musk at the time was “built on trust” and the two were very close.
“That is just a lot of money” to invest “on a handshake,” the judge said.
OpenAI has said Musk’s requested court order would “debilitate OpenAI’s business” and mission to the advantage of Musk and his own AI company and is based on “far-fetched” legal claims.
At the heart of the dispute is a 2017 internal power struggle at the fledgling startup that led to Altman becoming OpenAI’s CEO.
Emails disclosed by OpenAI show Musk had also sought to be CEO and grew frustrated after two other OpenAI co-founders said he would hold too much power as a major shareholder and chief executive if the startup succeeded in its goal to achieve better-than-human AI known as artificial general intelligence, or AGI. Musk has long voiced concerns about how advanced forms of AI could threaten humanity.
Altman eventually succeeded in becoming CEO and has remained so except for a period in 2023 when he was fired and then reinstated days later after the board that ousted him was replaced.
OpenAI has sought to demonstrate Musk’s early support for the idea of making OpenAI a for-profit business so it could raise money for the hardware and computer power that AI needs.
Musk is not the only one challenging OpenAI’s for-profit transition. Facebook and Instagram parent Meta Platforms has asked California’s attorney general to block it, and the office of Delaware’s attorney general has said it is reviewing the conversion.
It was not clear Tuesday when the case might go to trial. Musk’s lawyers initially said they would be ready by June after some back-and-forth with the two sides the judge indicated it probably won’t be until June 2026 at the earliest, but likely early 2027.