OpenAI Investor Evaluates Legal Action After Sam Altman's Dismissal

The dismissal of Sam Altman has disappointed OpenAI investor. (Photo: x @sama)

JAKARTA -Investors in OpenAI, a chatgpt developer, are exploring legal steps against the company council. This was revealed by a source that is familiar with the problem to Reuters on Monday, November 20. This happened after the Board of Directors fired CEO Sam Altman and triggered the potential of the employee's mass exodus.

The source states that investors work closely with legal advisors to study their options. It is not yet clear whether this investor will sue OpenAI.

Investors are worried that they can lose hundreds of millions of dollars they invest in OpenAI, which are gems in some of their portfolios, with the potential for the collapse of the hottest startups in the generative AI sector that developed rapidly.

Microsoft has 49% of shares in the company, according to sources who are familiar with this problem. Investors and other employees control 49%, with 2% owned by OpenAI's non -profit parent, according to Semafor.

OpenAI Council fired Altman on Friday 17 November after "Termination of Communication". On Monday, most of more than 700 OpenAI employees threatened to resign unless the company replaced the Board of Directors.

Venture capital investors usually have a council chair or voice strength in their portfolio companies, but opening is controlled by its parent company, nonprofit OpenAI, which according to the opening website is made to provide benefits "to humanity, not open investors."

"As a result, employees have more leaving power in putting pressure on the council than venture investors who help fund the company," said Minor Myers, a law professor at the University of Connecticut. "There is nothing exactly in the position of an injured investor," he said.

It is a feature, not a bug, from the opening structure, which was originally established as a non -profit but adds a subsidiary of profit-oriented companies in 2019 to collect capital. Maintaining control over the operation allows the nature of the non -profit to maintain the "core mission, governance, and supervision," according to the company's website.

The non-profit council has legal obligations to the organization they are watching. But these obligations, such as the obligation to be careful and avoid adverse transactions, provide a lot of freedom for leadership decisions, experts said.

These obligations can be further narrowed in company structures such as OpenAI, which uses companies with limited responsibilities as their operational arms, which are more potential to keep the non-profit director from investors, said Paul Weitzel, a law professor at the University of Nebraska.

Even if investors find a way to sue, Weitzel said that they would have a "weak" case. The company has broad concessions under the law to make business decisions, even failed decisions.

"You can fire a visionary founder," Weitzel said. Apple was also remembered to fire Steve Jobs in the 1980s, before calling him again about a decade later.