SAN FRANCISCO, May 15 (Reuters) - A group that opposed

OpenAI's restructuring wrote in a letter this week that the

startup's new organizational plan still does not go far enough

to safeguard the ChatGPT creator from generating dangerous

artificial intelligence technology.

In the letter dated May 12, submitted to the California and

Delaware attorneys-general, members of the 'Not For Private

Gain' group argued that while OpenAI's announcement earlier this

month to dial back some of its restructuring "might be a step in

the right direction," it still does not adequately prevent

OpenAI from straying from its original mission to ensure that

artificial intelligence is developed for the benefit of

humanity.

The larger group, comprising former OpenAI employees and AI

experts such as Geoffrey Hinton, had written an initial letter

in April opposing OpenAI's then plan to restructure to remove

control from its nonprofit parent entity.

The letter was part of a firestorm of criticism and legal

challenges, including a high-profile lawsuit filed by rival and

co-founder Elon Musk, that prompted OpenAI to dial back its

restructuring plan.

OpenAI, in which Microsoft ( MSFT ) has invested more than

$13 billion, now plans to convert its for-profit arm into a

public benefit corporation (PBC), with the nonprofit parent

controlling the PBC and becoming a "big shareholder" in it,

which it says will allow OpenAI to raise more capital to keep

pace in the expensive AI race.

A PBC is a structure designed to balance shareholder returns

with social goals, unlike nonprofits, which are solely focused

on public good.

But Monday's letter says OpenAI's new plan significantly

diminishes the nonprofit's existing authority. First, OpenAI's

current for-profit entity is required to advance its mission and

charter above any investor interests, while the proposed PBC is

not required to do so, it said.

Second, OpenAI's nonprofit, as the sole manager, has 100%

control over its for-profit entity today, granting it day-to-day

operational power such as the ability to fire executives. In the

proposed restructuring, the nonprofit would not have

comprehensive control over the PBC, which the group said is

concerning because the attorneys-general's enforcement powers

are derived solely from the nonprofit's authority.

(Reporting by Anna Tong in San Francisco; Editing by

Muralikumar Anantharaman)