OpenAI board unanimously rejects Elon Musk's $97.4 billion proposal
San Francisco (AP): OpenAI says its board of directors has unanimously rejected a $97.4 billion takeover bid by Elon Musk.
“OpenAI is not for sale, and the board has unanimously rejected Mr. Musk's latest attempt to disrupt his competition," said a statement Friday from Bret Taylor, chair of OpenAI's board.
OpenAI attorney William Savitt in a letter to Musk's attorney Friday said the proposal “is not in the best interests of OAI's mission and is rejected.”
Musk, an early OpenAI investor, began a legal offensive against the ChatGPT-maker nearly a year ago, suing for breach of contract over what he said was the betrayal of its founding aims as a nonprofit he helped found a decade ago.
Then on Monday, while that case was still awaiting a key ruling, Musk and his own AI startup, xAI, and a group of investment firms announced a bid to buy the nonprofit that controls OpenAI. Musk in a court filing Wednesday expanded on the proposal to acquire the nonprofit's controlling stake in the for-profit OpenAI subsidiary.
Savitt's letter Friday said that filing added “new material conditions to the proposal. As a result of that filing, it is now apparent that your clients' much-publicized bid' is in fact not a bid at all.” In any event, “even as first presented,” the board has unanimously rejected it, Savitt said.
Musk has alleged in the lawsuit that the companies are violating the terms of his foundational contributions to the charity. Musk had invested about $45 million in the startup from its founding until 2018, his lawyer has said.
He escalated the legal dispute late last year, adding new claims and defendants, including OpenAI's business partner Microsoft, and asking for a court order that would halt OpenAI's plans to more fully convert itself into a for-profit business. Musk also added xAI as a plaintiff, claiming that OpenAI was also unfairly stifling business competition.
A judge is still considering Musk's request but expressed scepticism about some of his claims in a court hearing last week.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Two arrested in K'taka for assaulting minors, uploading CSAM content
Bengaluru (PTI): Two men were arrested for allegedly sexually assaulting two minor girls, recording the acts on mobile phones and uploading the videos online as child sexual abuse material, police said on Thursday.
The accused have been identified as Kiran Kumar (29), hailing from Chitradurga district, and Aditya M K (20), hailing from Shivamogga district, they said.
A probe was initiated after information was received from the NCRP portal regarding a suspected instance of creation of Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) for online dissemination, police said.
Accordingly, a case was registered at Kaggalipura Police Station under relevant sections of the IT Act on May 10, they added.
Investigation revealed that two minor girl victims were exploited and videos were created and uploaded to the internet. The child victims have subsequently recorded their statements as per procedure and further necessary legal steps have been taken, Pronab Mohanty Director General of Police, Cyber Command, said in a statement.
Based on the statements of the victims, the accused persons, who allegedly assaulted the minors, recorded the acts on mobile phones and uploaded the videos online, were arrested, he said.
Following the probe, sections 65(2) (rape) and 70 (gangrape) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, along with relevant sections of the POCSO Act, have been added to the FIR, police said.
Officials collected relevant information and on May 12, arrested the accused persons and seized three mobile phones belonging to them, in which the videos had allegedly been recorded, he said.
The accused were later produced before the court and taken into police custody for further investigation, he added.
According to him, in CSAM cases, police usually apprehend offenders who have downloaded such content or have kept them in their possession after obtaining them from elsewhere, usually the internet.
"The present case is one of the very few instances where content creators and uploaders have been apprehended," Mohanty added.
