Joint letter requests transparency from OpenAI about its restructuring
A coalition of over 100 Nobel Prize winners, professors, whistleblowers, and public figures have released an open letter calling on OpenAI to answer 7 questions.
7
min read

A coalition of over 100 Nobel Prize winners, professors, whistleblowers, and public figures has released an open letter calling on OpenAI to be transparent about its controversial restructuring plans.
The letter, co-organized and published by the Midas Project at openai-transparency.org, raises critical questions about whether OpenAI will honor its founding mission to benefit humanity.
From Nonprofit to For-Profit: What's at Stake?
OpenAI was originally founded as a nonprofit with a legally binding commitment to ensure artificial general intelligence (AGI) benefits the public. The organization used this mission to raise money and attract top talent. However, investor pressure has fundamentally changed the company's trajectory.
The signatories argue that OpenAI hasn't been straightforward about this restructuring, describing the removal of profit caps as merely a "simplification" while downplaying the potential disempowerment of the nonprofit board, and saying that their new structure will let them put purpose over profit when it seems the opposite may be true.
The Core Concern: A Deal Made in Secret
The letter begins with: "OpenAI is currently sitting on both sides of the table in a closed boardroom, making a deal on humanity's behalf without allowing us to see the contract, know the terms, or sign off on the decision."
This reflects growing concerns about OpenAI's potential transition from a nonprofit organization to a for-profit company. As reported by The Washington Post, OpenAI's massive $40 billion funding round hinges on shedding its nonprofit status entirely.

Seven Critical Questions Demanding Answers
The open letter poses seven key questions that are critical for the public to understand OpenAI's future direction:
1. Mission vs. Profits
Will OpenAI continue to have a legal duty to prioritize its charitable mission over profits?
By default, public benefit corporations do not legally need to prioritize mission over profit, they only need to balance these concerns.
2. Nonprofit Control
Will OpenAI's nonprofit continue to have full management control over the company?
OpenAI’s comments, including in their letter to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, suggest the nonprofit may retain nominal control while losing substantive powers.
3. Board Equity
Which nonprofit directors will receive equity in OpenAI's new structure?
The current board includes AI investors and entrepreneurs who may benefit financially from the restructuring they're approving. Will they receive equity in a new company?
4. Profit Caps
Will OpenAI maintain its commitment to cap profits and devote excess returns to humanity's benefit?
Leadership previously said the wealth generated by AGI would be "for sure not okay" for a single group of investors to own, and that if they succeed, the “vast majority” of what they earn will be returned to humanity. Is this still true?.
5. AGI Commercialization
Does OpenAI plan to commercialize AGI instead of maintaining nonprofit control?
The company once promised AGI would remain under nonprofit oversight for humanity's benefit, effectively terminating the rights for partners to sell their models at that critical threshold. However, recent reporting suggests they are considering pushing back or scrapping that commitment.
6. Safety Commitments
Will OpenAI honor its charter's pledge to stop competing and assist other organizations if they approach AGI first?
OpenAI’s charter includes a promise that, because an all out race to AGI could pose severe risks, if another company is close to developing the technology, they will stop racing and start assisting to reduce the market pressures and encourage safety. Is this still true?
7. Public Transparency
Will OpenAI release key documents showing what the public stands to lose, including operating agreements and profit estimates shared with investors?
And will the public ever get to see the details of our current entitlements and safeguards as they are legally instantiated in OpenAI documents, or will they continue to be quietly changed without our knowledge (as happened to the profit caps in 2023)?
Distinguished Voices Calling for Accountability
The letter's signatories represent a remarkable cross-section of AI expertise and :
Nobel Laureates:
- Geoffrey Hinton (often called the "godfather of AI")
- Sheldon Lee Glashow (Harvard University)
- Giorgio Parisi (Sapienza University)
- Sir Oliver Hart (Harvard University)
Tech Leaders:
- Vitalik Buterin (Co-founder of Ethereum)
- Multiple former OpenAI affiliates including Daniel Kokotajlo and Helen Toner
- Audrey Tang (Institute for Ethics in AI, Oxford, former Minister of Digital Affairs of Taiwan)
Public Figures:
- Sir Stephen Fry (Writer, Director, Actor)
- Sean Carroll (Johns Hopkins University)
- Rafael Lozano-Hemmer (Antimodular Studio)
Academic Leaders:
- Lawrence Lessig (Harvard Law School)
- Stuart Russell (UC Berkeley, AI Safety expert)
- Max Tegmark (MIT, Future of Life Institute)
The diversity of signatories, spanning Nobel laureates, tech pioneers, legal scholars, and former OpenAI insiders, underscores the broad public concern about OpenAI's direction.
What This Means for the Future of AI
The restructuring has implications far beyond OpenAI itself. As the letter states: "We are all part of humanity, and thus beneficiaries of OpenAI's mission. Everyone has a stake in this restructuring and deserves to know the details."
The fundamental question is whether one of the world's most powerful AI companies will prioritize its stated mission to benefit humanity or succumb to investor pressure for maximum returns. The answer will affect everyone.
The Path Forward
The open letter and its coalition of signers are calling for basic transparency about how the restructuring will affect OpenAI's legal commitments to the public. The ball is now in OpenAI's court.
Will the company that once promised to ensure AGI benefits all of humanity provide the transparency its own mission demands? The answer may determine not just OpenAI's future, but the future of AI governance itself.
We look forward to hearing OpenAI's response.
To read the full letter and add your name to the growing list of signatories, visit openai-transparency.org
Research, updates, and insights from the frontlines of AI accountability.
We lead strategic initiatives to monitor tech companies, counter corporate propaganda.
5
min read
A pro-AI, dark-money group tied to David Sacks appears linked to a new astroturfing campaign
5
min read
SpaceXAI just released Grok 4.5. It may have broken California’s AI law in the process.
5
min read
A Pro-AI Super PAC's Secret Meme Sockpuppets

3
min read
The Midas Project Joins Coalition Warning about xAI’s Track Record in light of SpaceX’s IPO
The Midas Project, alongside a coalition including Encode, Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology, and Guidelight AI Standards, released "xAI: The Unpriced Risk in SpaceX's IPO."
Frequently asked questions
Have more questions? Our team is happy to help, contact us.
We engage in a combination of research, outreach, and public advocacy to ensure that AI companies are meeting public expectations, and living up to their past promises, when it comes to ensuring responsible AI development and deployment.
The most important component of our work is helping to identify and disseminate industry best practices for AI development. We review technical literature, regulatory guidance, and case studies to distill concrete measures—such as frontier-model risk assessments, red-teaming requirements, audit regimes, and whistle-blower protections—and advocate for the most important voluntary steps that companies can take today to ensure they are acting responsible.
We also monitor whether companies follow their stated policies and industry norms. When evidence shows back-tracking or inadequate controls, we document these gaps and publicly press for corrective action—mobilizing employees, customers, and civil-society allies until the company adopts the necessary safeguards.
Finally, we publicize our research to help ensure the public is aware of how AI developers stack up on safety and responsibility. We release concise scorecards, incident analyses, and memos so that regulators, investors, and the wider public can see how individual developers perform on safety and responsibility.
Various AI experts including Nick Bostrom and Stuart Russell have compared the development of advanced AI to the myth of King Midas.
According to the legend, King Midas once asked a powerful satyr to make it so that whatever he touched instantly turned into gold. At first, he was thrilled with his new powers. But the King soon discovered that he couldn’t touch food, water, or even his family without instantly turning them to metal. In other words, the sudden attainment of an incredible power with insufficiently well-specified goals and safeguards led to a terrible tragedy.
Much like King Midas, tech companies are now eagerly pursuing incredible wealth and power by developing artificial intelligence, a technology that will change our world forever. But how will we know that it is designed in alignment with our collective human values? If we misspecify even a single goal or safeguard for these systems, how will we prevent them from causing an incredible catastrophe?
In the words of Stuart Russell, “If you continue on the current path, the better AI gets, the worse things get for us. For any given incorrectly stated objective, the better a system achieves that objective, the worse it is.”
The Midas Project is a nonprofit organization founded in early 2024 by Tyler Johnston. Our work is supported by a small core team and a wider base of volunteers and supporters. We are a nonprofit, tax-exempt, 501(c)(3) organization that relies on donations from the public.
No. One of our central values is a pro-technology attitude.
Progress in technology has improved lives for millions of people around the globe (after all, without it, we wouldn’t have penicillin, air conditioning, or the internet). Artificial intelligence is already being used by millions to help improve medicine, education, and overall living standards. We believe this progress should continue, and we hope AI will be a positive force in the world.
However, we are also realists — and skeptical realists at that. We believe advanced AI systems may be a “dual-use” technology that can be used for harm as well. In order to avert social inequality, concentration of power, or AI-driven catastrophes, everybody needs to have a voice at the table when decisions about development and deployment are being made.
Currently, the vast majority of these decisions about the future of AI are being made in shadowy corporate boardrooms with little oversight and accountability. That’s why The Midas Project is committed to raising awareness about the risks of AI, and ensuring that global citizens are given a chance to make their voice heard.
If you’d like to get involved, consider signing up for our newsletter, joining as an official volunteer, or making a charitable donation today.
You can email us at info@themidasproject.com, or reach out via the form on our contact page.