None of that can be a reason for a step like this. OpenAI can easily charge much more for their products, and there is a market for even extremely high prices (even if not as big) and given this is a non profit, it doesn't even need to make billions of dollars in money.
>>crop_r+(OP)
OpenAI exists both as a nonprofit and, for several years now, as a for-profit company [1] that has taken billions of dollars in investment. It needs to make billions of dollars to return to investors just as much as any other for-profit company does.
>>j45+bc
I think the board is required to be a majority non-equity-holders precisely because an equity-holding board will not keep to their non-profit mission.
>>jprete+2g
Since it's a private non-profit corp it might be whatever they want the rules to be.
Arms-length neutrality on a board in silicon valley might still work like the rest as other comments have stated. Maybe someone can shed some light on it
>>j45+PM1
I’m presuming it was put into place as part of creating the capped-for-profit entity, to make sure the for-profit couldn’t itself permanently misalign the non-profit’s board.