OpenAI has confirmed it is collaborating with rivals Anthropic and Google DeepMind on AI safety measures, a move that underscores the industry's response to mounting concerns over the technology's economic and security implications. The engagement, which has been underway for several weeks, was disclosed by OpenAI's global policy chief, Chris Lehane, during a briefing in Washington on Tuesday.
Lehane emphasized that the three companies do not believe they require an antitrust waiver to coordinate on safety matters, stating, "It's better to try to work together to prioritize safety." This coordination comes as lawmakers and industry leaders grapple with how to address potential risks associated with advanced AI systems.
Industry leaders weigh in
The push for greater safety measures gained traction after Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei published a 3,800-word essay on Saturday, calling for restraint in developing the most advanced AI systems to allow researchers to better understand potential threats. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Elon Musk, who leads SpaceX and xAI, both publicly endorsed the essay's message.
According to The Information, discussions among the three companies about a shared industry standards body have been ongoing since at least July, with working-group meetings held as recently as last week. The initial proposal came from Google DeepMind founder Demis Hassabis, who suggested a standards body modeled on the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), which oversees Wall Street under SEC supervision. Hassabis envisioned an organization that would evaluate advanced AI models before release, funded by industry but staffed with independent technical experts.
Political landscape divided
Lehane said he was in Washington meeting lawmakers and that OpenAI would support bipartisan proposals to address catastrophic AI risks. These include a federal AI governance framework proposed by Republican Representative Jay Obernolte and Democrat Lori Trahan, as well as a Senate proposal led by Majority Leader John Thune, Republican Ted Cruz, and Democrat Amy Klobuchar.
A separate bill from Senators Jim Banks and Adam Schiff would grant AI companies a limited antitrust exemption to share information about risks, including loss of control over AI systems, cyber threats, and Chinese attempts to exfiltrate data. That measure has been folded into the annual defense bill.
However, the likelihood of any AI legislation passing this year remains low. The House leaves Washington Thursday and will not return until after the November elections, and the brief lame-duck session afterward is expected to focus on the Pentagon budget. President Trump has publicly opposed AI safety guardrails, dismissing concerns raised by Anthropic and OpenAI as "a hoax" in social media posts Monday.
Industry split on coordination
Not all AI companies support the coordination effort. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg raised concerns about a national AI regulator in an August call with Trump, according to The Information, and a related White House draft executive order was shelved after failing to gain sufficient backing within the administration.
House Speaker Mike Johnson told CNN on Sunday there is "no consensus" among AI companies on what standards should look like, adding that any framework would need to be a partnership between industry and lawmakers. Cohere CEO Aidan Gomez was more pointed in his criticism, warning on X that letting the largest AI companies set shared rules could disadvantage smaller competitors.
The coordination comes amid broader market movements, with AI stocks facing pressure as Anthropic and OpenAI urge slower model development. Additionally, Anthropic's Claude has been involved in defense projects, raising further questions about AI's dual-use nature. Meanwhile, Anthropic's 2030 AI scenarios project GDP swings from +1.6% to +32%, highlighting the economic stakes.
As the debate continues, investors are watching how these dynamics might affect the sector. The outcome of these discussions could shape the regulatory environment for AI, with potential implications for companies across the technology landscape.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.
