zlacker

Uh, you have a nonprofit board firing a CEO at a board meeting that doesn't even sound like was properly noticed. Was the board president even given time to attend?

And Microsoft has total rights to the models and weights, so they can CONTINUE their services and then spin up with Sam's new company.

>>tempno+(OP)
*Uh, you have a nonprofit board firing a CEO at a board meeting that doesn't even sound like was properly noticed. Was the board president even given time to attend?*

I think it's reasonable to assume that even a controversial board checked with their lawyer and did what was legally required. Especially as nobody involved seems to be claiming otherwise.

>>tempno+(OP)
If they had written consents from a majority of the board to remove Altman and Brockman from the board, then depending on the applicable nonprofit law and corporate governance documents, the board removals may very well have been legally conducted without need for a properly noticed board meeting. (For the actual firing of Altman, that might have been legal either through written consents or through a board meeting after the removals of Altman and Brockman.)

Having no information on what laws and governance documents apply to OpenAI or on what steps the board took, I express no opinion on whether the legal requirements were actually met, but it’s possible they were.

>>static+U1
Difference between "legally required" and "above clown car level professionalism".