OpenAI Subpoenas AI Advocacy Groups Amid Musk Lawsuit

OpenAI delivered a subpoena to Nathan Calvin, a lawyer at Encode AI, via a sheriff's deputy, and also sought Calvin's private communications. The company says the action is part of its countersuit against Elon Musk, alleging the billionaire is using “bad‑faith tactics” to impede OpenAI’s for‑profit transition. Encode AI, which pushes AI safety legislation such as California’s SB 53, says the subpoena is an intimidation tactic. Other groups, including The Midas Project, have also received subpoenas requesting extensive contact lists. OpenAI officials defended the moves as routine legal discovery.

Background and Initial Subpoena

Attorney Nathan Calvin, who works on policy at Encode AI, reported that a sheriff’s deputy arrived at his home to serve a subpoena issued by OpenAI. The subpoena targeted both the organization and Calvin personally, requesting private messages he exchanged with California legislators, college students, and former OpenAI employees. Calvin framed the action as an attempt by OpenAI to use its ongoing lawsuit against Elon Musk as a pretext to intimidate critics of the company’s restructuring plans.

OpenAI’s Legal Strategy

OpenAI’s countersuit against Musk alleges that the billionaire has engaged in “bad‑faith tactics to slow down OpenAI.” As part of that case, OpenAI subpoenaed Encode AI to determine whether the group received funding from Musk. The company also issued a subpoena to Meta to explore the social network’s involvement in Musk’s proposed acquisition of the platform.

Encode AI’s Advocacy Role

Encode AI is an AI‑safety advocacy organization. It has drafted an open letter urging OpenAI to preserve its nonprofit mission amid corporate restructuring and has supported California’s AI safety bill, SB 53, which requires large AI firms to disclose safety and security practices. Calvin stated that he did not turn over any of the requested documents, emphasizing that the subpoena was unrelated to any legitimate legal need.

Responses from OpenAI Executives

OpenAI’s chief strategy officer, Aaron Kwon, responded on the company’s official channel, saying the subpoena’s purpose was to understand why Encode AI joined Musk’s legal challenge. Kwon also noted that it is common for deputies to serve as part‑time process servers. OpenAI’s head of mission alignment, Joshua Achiam, posted on X expressing concern that the tactics could undermine the company’s mission, describing the situation as “not great.”

Other Affected Groups

Tyler Johnston, founder of The Midas Project, reported that his organization also received a subpoena from OpenAI. The request asked for a comprehensive list of journalists, congressional offices, partner organizations, former employees, and members of the public that The Midas Project had communicated with about OpenAI’s restructuring. Jack Kelly, chief of staff for The Midas Project, criticized Kwon’s justification, noting that the organization was not a party to the Musk lawsuit yet still faced a subpoena.

Implications for AI Policy Advocacy

The series of subpoenas has raised concerns among AI‑policy advocates that legal actions may be employed to silence or pressure groups pushing for greater regulation and transparency. Encode AI and The Midas Project view the subpoenas as intimidation tactics rather than standard discovery. OpenAI maintains that the requests are part of legitimate legal proceedings related to its dispute with Musk.