Completely rewrite the following article in a fresh and original style. Ensure the new content conveys the same sentiment and message as the original. The rewritten article should:
- Start with a compelling introduction that hooks the reader (do not label this section).
- Maintain any lists and points as they are, using numbering and bullet points where necessary. Rewrite the explanations and discussions around these points to make them fresh and original. Ensure the lists are formatted correctly with proper numbering or bullet points.
-
Organize the content into clear, logical sections. Subheadings are not mandatory. Each section should have a subheading only if it enhances readability and comprehension.
-
End with a strong conclusion that summarizes the key points and provides a closing thought or call to action (do not label this section).
-
Ensure it is formatted properly with adequate line spacing
Make sure the article flows coherently, is engaging, and keeps the reader interested until the end. Reorganize and structure the content efficiently to enhance readability and comprehension. Use varied sentence structures and vocabulary to avoid monotony. Avoid directly copying any sentences or phrases from the original content. Here is the original content:
In a new motion filed late Friday in his lawsuit against OpenAI, Elon Musk’s attorneys have asked for a preliminary injunction to stop OpenAI from transitioning to a for-profit enterprise, reports TechCrunch. They also asked the judge to forbid the company from continuing alleged practices that they say violate US antitrust laws.Musk’s lawyers claim that because of CEO Sam Altman’s alleged self-dealing, OpenAI “will likely lack sufficient funds to pay damages” if Musk wins the suit. The motion follows reports of OpenAI’s intent to become a for-profit business and that it recently began early talks with regulators to move its structural change forward. As for antitrust claims, Musk’s lawyers allege that OpenAI and Microsoft “told investors not to fund their mutual competitors,” which they say violates the Sherman Act. And they claim that Musk “verified that at least one major investor” that had previously contributed to an xAI funding round has since “declined to invest in xAI.” They also allege that OpenAI benefits from “wrongfully obtained competitively sensitive information” gained through Microsoft connections they insist are effectively prohibited under the Clayton Act. The lawyers claim that “the very reason Microsoft obtained its board seat” — referring to Microsoft VP Dee Templeton’s time as a non-voting board member at OpenAI — “was to coordinate business decisions with OpenAI.” OpenAI spokeswoman Hannah Wong said in a statement emailed to The Verge:Elon’s fourth attempt, which again recycles the same baseless complaints, continues to be utterly without merit.Update November 30th: Added statement from OpenAI spokeswoman Hannah Wong.
Leave feedback about this