Damned if you do and damned if you don’t apparently. Filed Friday, a lawsuit accuses Anthropic, OpenAI, SpaceXAI, Google of AI pacing ‘collusion’.

As reported by The Hill (Lawsuit accuses Anthropic, OpenAI, SpaceXAI, Google of AI pacing ‘collusion’, written by Finya Swai and available here), AI companies Anthropic, OpenAI, SpaceXAI and Google are being sued over alleged collusion as pressure mounts to slow the rapid development of AI.

The complaint, filed Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, pointed to a recent proposal from Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who called for “industry-wide coordination” to “pace the frontier” as concerns mount over the risks posed by increasingly powerful AI. It contends that while individual safety measures are lawful, a collective agreement to suppress progress constitutes an antitrust violation that overcharges consumers for stagnant services.

“We must slow the pace in which we improve the capabilities of AI models,” Amodei wrote in a Sept. 12 blog post.

The plaintiffs alleged that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, SpaceXAI founder Elon Musk and Google DeepMind co-founder Demis Hassabis made an illegal business agreement among competitors by agreeing to slow the development of their AI systems, violating federal antitrust law.

Within hours of Amodei publishing his blog post, Musk responded, saying “Dario is right,” while Altman also said he agreed with Amodei. Hassabis called the proposal “the right path forward,” according to the complaint.

Nick Rowley, one of the attorneys who filed the lawsuit on behalf of four plaintiffs, said decisions about AI safeguards should be made through government action rather than private agreements among major technology companies.

Rowley said in a statement to Politico that the case was filed to ensure “private self-serving agreements between the world’s most powerful ‘for profit’ technology companies” don’t result in AI “quickly spin[ing] out of human control.”

“Humanity deserves iron clad safeguards when it comes to extinction event threats such as nuclear warfare and now the biggest risk to mankind in history,” Rowley continued. “The rule of law should be established transparently and lawfully by our government, with accountability to the public.”

Perhaps so, but (so far) that’s not happening.

Amodei’s proposal had already raised antitrust concerns among lawmakers in Washington, after the Anthropic CEO suggested the government could provide a “narrow waiver for certain kinds of safety conversations” so AI companies could work together on standards without violating U.S. antitrust law.

“There is absolutely no world in which I will consent to giving the most powerful companies in the history of the world — a small group of three or four of them — antitrust exemptions so they can what … collude together?” Hawley said. “Absolutely no way that’s happening.”

Does public agreement constitute collusion? Normally, when companies “collude”, they aren’t so open about it.

So, what do you think? Do you think statements of agreement between the leaders of four AI companies constitute collusion? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Image created using ChatGPT, using the term “robot CEO stuck between a rock and a hard place”.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.