This week, one major AI company announced a $20 million donation to a political group campaigning for more regulation of the technology. Its main rival, OpenAI, however, is telling its employees it won’t be following suit.
In a memo to staff, OpenAI’s head of global affairs explained that while the company allows its employees to personally support political causes, OpenAI itself won’t be making similar moves anytime soon. The executive clarified in an interview that OpenAI is holding off on contributing to political action committees or certain non-profit groups because it wants to retain direct control over its political spending.
“We do believe it’s really important that this issue transcends partisan politics,” he said.
The timing is critical. Both companies are reportedly considering major public offerings this year, while Congress is working to craft rules for the industry that could last for a decade or more. As elections approach, voters are increasingly concerned about the consequences of AI, from energy use and privacy to job displacement.
Even though OpenAI as a corporation is not making super PAC donations, its executives and largest investors are actively involved. The company’s president and co-founder, along with his wife, have donated millions to a super PAC. Furthermore, the president and several top investors have collectively given over $100 million to a bipartisan super PAC that advocates against state-level AI regulation, pushing instead for a national framework—a point the global affairs head acknowledged in his memo. This group has already funded ads opposing a New York political candidate who is a vocal proponent of AI safeguards.
OpenAI’s leadership stated that the company supports “a national federal framework” and has already endorsed bills at both state and federal levels on various issues this year.
The other AI company, which was founded with a strong focus on safety, often highlights the need for regulation. Its CEO regularly discusses the risks posed by AI. The company explained its $20 million donation by saying it did not want to “sit on the sideline” while AI regulation is being developed.
“We need good policy: flexible regulation that allows us to reap the benefits of AI, keep the risks in check, and keep America ahead in the AI race,” the company wrote. It emphasized the importance of keeping advanced technology away from adversaries, maintaining safeguards, promoting job growth, protecting children, and demanding transparency from AI developers.
This stance has drawn criticism from the current administration. A senior White House official overseeing AI policy blamed the company last year for fueling a “regulatory frenzy,” accusing it of a “sophisticated regulatory capture strategy based on fear-mongering.” The administration has taken action, with the president signing an executive order to prevent states from creating their own AI laws in favor of a single, yet-to-be-established national policy.
The differing positions on regulation are just the latest chapter in the long-running rivalry between the two AI giants. This competition burst into public view recently when one company ran a high-profile ad for its ad-free chatbot, just days before the other began testing ads within its own popular AI conversation platform.
