iWorld
Zee refutes claims by Star made in London court
Mumbai: This is with reference to our disclosure dated 15 March 2024, informing that Star India Pvt Ltd (“Star”) has initiated arbitration proceedings against the Company, under the alliance agreement dated 26 August 2022, entered between Star and the Company, by filing a request for arbitration (“Application”) under the Arbitration Rules of the London Court of International Arbitration (“LCIA”).
Pursuant to Regulation 30 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, we hereby inform you that, on September 16, 2024, Star has filed its Statement of Case before the LCIA Arbitral Tribunal, in which it has, inter alia, sought to declare that the Alliance Agreement between Star and the Company has been validly terminated by Star and damages to be determined as of the date of the Tribunal’s award (with such damages quantified, as at 31 August 2024 as proxy date of the award, at US$940 million) along with costs, expenses and applicable interest until full payment.
The Company categorically refutes all claims and assertions made by Star including its claims for damages. The arbitration is at its initial stage and the LCIA Arbitral Tribunal is yet to determine if the Company is liable in any manner. The Company will, on merits, strongly contest all unfounded claims by Star and reserves all its rights.
iWorld
OpenAI hits back at Elon Musk’s lawsuit ahead of trial
Company calls claims “baseless” and accuses Musk of trying to disrupt a rival.
MUMBAI: When the stakes are measured in billions and egos are involved, even Silicon Valley titans can turn a courtroom into a battlefield. OpenAI has issued a sharp public response to Elon Musk’s ongoing lawsuit, accusing the billionaire of filing the case to harass a competitor rather than address genuine concerns. In a strongly worded statement shared on its official X account, OpenAI described Musk’s allegations as “baseless” and suggested the lawsuit is an attempt to disrupt the company as the case heads toward trial later this month in Oakland, California.
The response comes after Musk’s legal team recently amended the complaint, proposing that any damages potentially exceeding $150 billion should go to OpenAI’s nonprofit entity rather than to Musk personally. OpenAI questioned the timing and motive behind this change, calling it a late-stage attempt to “pretend to change his tune” on the nonprofit structure.
The company further labelled the lawsuit a “harassment campaign”, arguing that Musk’s actions are driven by personal rivalry, ego, and a desire for greater control and financial upside.
At the heart of the dispute is Musk’s claim that OpenAI has abandoned its original nonprofit mission of developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. A co-founder who left in 2018, Musk is seeking governance changes, including the removal of CEO Sam Altman from the nonprofit board, and the return of certain financial gains linked to Altman and President Greg Brockman.
OpenAI has firmly rejected these allegations, maintaining that its current hybrid structure, a public-benefit corporation overseen by a nonprofit parent remains true to its long-term goals. The company has also previously accused Musk of anti-competitive behaviour aimed at weakening its leadership.
As the case prepares for a jury trial, this public exchange highlights the deepening rift between two of the most influential figures in the AI revolution and raises broader questions about governance, mission, and power in the fast-moving world of artificial intelligence.
In the high-stakes game of AI, it seems the real drama isn’t just inside the models, it’s playing out in courtrooms too.
