Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts

Florida Sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, Accusing Them of Putting Profit Over Safety (variety.com) 42

Florida's attorney general has sued (PDF) OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, alleging the company prioritized growth and market value over user safety and failed to adequately warn about risks tied to ChatGPT. The lawsuit, the first by a U.S. state over OpenAI safety concerns, is separate from a criminal investigation the state opened into OpenAI in April. Variety reports: In the 83-page complaint filed in Florida circuit court, the state claimed OpenAI's rise was backed by "a web of deceit and the exploitation of users (including Floridians), leveraging their data and safety to boost OpenAI's market value at unacceptable costs." The state wants to hold Altman "personally liable for the harm he has caused Floridians through his reckless and willful conduct as founder and CEO of OpenAI, including his utter disregard for the risk to human life caused by his firms' conduct."

[...] Throughout the complaint, filed in the state's circuit court of the 10th judicial circuit, the State of Florida claimed OpenAI's "careless introduction" of ChatGPT had led to an increase in murders and suicides. The suit alleged Florida's minors have "become addicted to a tool that feigns human compassion to collect their data with no parental oversight." It cited instances in the past year of the alleged use of ChatGPT to plan a mass shooting at Florida State University in April 2025 and the murders of two graduate students at the University of South Florida in April. "This litany of harms is driven by Defendants' insatiable quest to win the AI arms race and amass large fortunes, despite knowing the danger of ChatGPT," the state wrote in the complaint.

Florida accused OpenAI of four counts of deceptive and unfair trade practices, two counts of negligence, two counts of violating product liability laws, one count of fraudulent misrepresentation and another count of causing a public nuisance. It is seeking civil penalties and court orders demanding OpenAI restrict the data it collects from minors and that it stop "continuing to misrepresent or fail to warn of the risks of ChatGPT." "People are getting hurt, parents are getting deceived and they need to pay for it by opening up their checkbooks and changing the program to ensure there are parental controls," Uthmeimer said at a press conference Monday.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Florida Sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, Accusing Them of Putting Profit Over Safety

Comments Filter:
  • by smithmc ( 451373 ) on Monday June 01, 2026 @05:04PM (#66170054) Journal
    I would think that DeSantis would personally be handing Altman the key to the state or something.
    • by minkwe ( 222331 ) on Monday June 01, 2026 @05:36PM (#66170098) Journal

      I think they have a problem with Elon's enemies.

      • ^this, the interest is nothing to do with safety, purely they are TRump/Elon supporters and hence they weaponise the their court systems. After all if safety was the concern they would be after Grok as well which has even worse safety record than ChatGPT.
        • I was kind of thinking the same. I mean it is states like FL that are all over pedo material and grok from what I understand is the goto ai for nude images. Personally I use ai for zip, nada. Met with a friend the other day thinking I might be interested in helping them with a project they had started using ai. I'm guessing they wanted me to go in and rewrite the ghoul the ai spit out. It was a hard pass. They had no idea what the ai had written and did not even know the language the ai used, I think python
      • Maybe. Problem is, it only costs $1m for the Donald to issue a pre-emptive pardon.
  • The only thing that stops a bad guy with an AI is a good guy with an AI.
  • Florida calling out insane corporate behavior in the name of profits was not on my bingo card for this week.

    That said, suing one company over putting profit above safety seems a little small-scale. That's seems to be the priority of all businesses now, and anything ahead of profit tend to get blasted for it by Wall Street or "investors."

  • Protect Racket (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Slashdotgirl ( 912338 ) on Monday June 01, 2026 @07:24PM (#66170268)
    TL:DR: The "De Santis" government is too lazy too do any real work, that is "legislation" so Florida is openly using lawfare by suing for money and control and waving a criminal probe to raise the temperature and skip the hard job of passing precise legislation.

    From what the government filed and what it announced, I do not see a narrow, clean “we found one harmed person and we are fixing it” effort. I see a two pronged pressure play built to push OpenAI toward a settlement or a judge ordered set of rules.

    Florida is taking a two-part approach to tackle this issue. First, they're filing a civil lawsuit. The state's Attorney General is specifically targeting OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman, along with other individuals. This isn't just about going after a company, it's about putting pressure on the people in charge. By naming them personally, Florida is turning up the heat and making it more likely that they'll settle.

    The state isn't just saying that some people used a tool in a bad way. They're saying that OpenAI and its leaders promoted and ran the tool in ways that were deceptive or unfair, which goes against Florida's consumer protection laws. They're also adding a claim of "public nuisance," which means they think the tool is causing harm to the community as a whole. This approach shows that Florida is serious about holding OpenAI and its leaders accountable for their actions.

    The state of Florida is seeking two main things from this civil case: financial penalties and control over how the product operates within the state. The financial penalties would serve as a form of punishment, while the control would come in the form of a court order that dictates how the product is managed, particularly when it comes to minors. There's a strong emphasis on protecting children under the age of 13, as well as enforcing strict rules around kids' data.

    This approach is often referred to as the "think of the children" tactic, which can be a powerful emotional trigger. It's also a politically convenient move, as it shifts the focus away from the role of parents in supervising their kids and onto the company instead of the state. By doing so, it creates a narrative that puts the onus on the company and the government to ensure children's safety, rather than emphasizing the importance of parental responsibility. This strategy can be effective in swaying public opinion and garnering support for the state's cause.

    The state of Florida is trying to show that something needs to be done right away by pointing to some big examples that grab people's attention. These examples include advice that supposedly leads to violence, self-harm and interactions with young users that sound like addiction. They're using the FSU shooting as a strong example to make their point.

    The state of Florida has a second approach to deal with the situation, which is a criminal investigation related to the shooting incident. The government is looking into the possibility of assigning criminal responsibility, such as determining whether a particular tool contributed to the crime. Even if the investigation doesn't lead to any charges, it can still be useful in gathering information and gaining leverage.

    The subpoenas issued during the investigation can compel OpenAI to provide internal documents, including policies, training materials, safety protocols and procedures for escalating issues. Any evidence that comes to light can then be used to support claims in the civil case, such as allegations that the company was aware of certain issues or that their public statements about safety didn't match their internal actions. In essence, the criminal investigation can help generate evidence that makes the civil case stronger.

    This approach allows the government to build a stronger case and increase pressure on the company to take responsibility for their actions. By exploring the criminal aspects of the case, the government can gain a better understa
  • Blaming AI, especially as it's not Elon's AI is easy.

    If American politicians really wanted to do something about shootings and suicides they'd look at introducing meaningful firearm controls, most notably penalties for misuse, stop glorifying guns and violence (fix the culture behind the shootings) and do something to help the mental health of Americans (starting with the bullying that has become endemic to American culture)... But that's all way too sensible where you can just blame the right AI for all
  • by RUs1729 ( 10049396 ) on Tuesday June 02, 2026 @10:27AM (#66170998)
    Well, that's how a capitalist, free market economy is conceived in the US: the fiduciary duty of for-profit companies consists of maximizing profits for their shareholders, and ethical considerations must not get in the way of the pursuit of that goal.
  • I suspect that they won't sue the other AI companies.

The Tao is like a stack: the data changes but not the structure. the more you use it, the deeper it becomes; the more you talk of it, the less you understand.

Working...