When Nathan Calvin, founder of the AI policy nonprofit Encode Justice, posted a 15-part thread on X (formerly Twitter) on October 10, he ignited a firestorm around OpenAI’s political conduct. His claims that the company used intimidation tactics and backroom lobbying to undermine California’s Senate Bill 53 (SB 53) have since drawn high-profile attention, including a stark statement from Elon Musk, who simply wrote:
“OpenAI is built on a lie.”
Behind the Scenes of SB 53
SB 53 is a landmark California bill that requires advanced AI developers to conduct safety audits, disclose risks, and ensure transparency before releasing powerful models.
According to Calvin, OpenAI’s actions behind the scenes were far from cooperative. He alleges the company sent a private letter to Governor Gavin Newsom, attempting to exempt firms doing AI work for the federal government from key compliance measures, effectively carving out a legal escape hatch for itself.
Calvin described this as “gutting the bill,” directly contradicting OpenAI’s public statement that it “worked to improve” the legislation. “When I saw that claim,” he wrote, “I literally laughed out loud.”
The Shadow of Chris Lehane
Much of Calvin’s frustration centers on Chris Lehane, OpenAI’s vice president of global affairs and a veteran political strategist. Lehane’s past PR clients — Goldman Sachs, Boeing, and The Weinstein Company — and his reputation for “aggressive messaging” loom large.
A New Yorker profile once quoted a colleague saying of Lehane:
“The goal was intimidation — to let everyone know that if they mess with us, they’ll regret it.”
Calvin suggests that this same ethos now defines OpenAI’s dealings with critics and policymakers. “Encode has three full-time employees,” he wrote. “Going against the highest-valued private company in the world is terrifying.”
Legal Scrutiny and Ethical Questions
The allegations arrive amid other controversies. Calvin cited a magistrate judge’s criticism of OpenAI’s conduct during discovery in its lawsuit with Elon Musk, using it as an example of the company’s broader lack of transparency.
Despite his criticism, Calvin acknowledged that many OpenAI employees “genuinely care about being a force for good” and praised the company’s AI safety research. But his closing question hit at the company’s founding mission:
“Does anyone believe these actions are consistent with OpenAI’s nonprofit mission to ensure AGI benefits humanity?”
Musk’s Comment Adds Fuel to the Fire
Elon Musk, one of OpenAI’s original co-founders and now a sharp critic, amplified Calvin’s thread with a blunt declaration:
“OpenAI is built on a lie.”
The remark, viewed millions of times, further inflamed the debate over whether OpenAI’s transformation from nonprofit research lab to Microsoft-backed corporate entity has compromised its integrity and transparency.
A Broader Pattern in AI Politics
The episode highlights a growing global tension: AI companies publicly advocate for regulation but often privately shape or resist the very rules meant to govern them.
If Calvin’s claims hold true, OpenAI’s behind-the-scenes behavior mirrors that of powerful incumbents in other industries, using influence to control the regulatory narrative while maintaining a veneer of public accountability.
As one observer noted, the line between “AI safety advocate” and “AI power broker” is becoming increasingly hard to draw.
Discover more from Semiconductors Insight
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
