Krafton CEO's ChatGPT Consultation Sparks Controversy in Subnautica 2 Legal Battle

In an ongoing legal conflict between Krafton and the original architects of Unknown Worlds, the studio behind the anticipated game Subnautica 2, a peculiar element has surfaced. This involves the alleged utilization of ChatGPT by Krafton's chief executive, Changham Kim, to devise strategies for circumventing contractual earnout obligations to the game's developers. This disclosure, unearthed amidst court documents, has cast a shadow on the company's prior assertions and ignited a debate concerning the appropriate use of artificial intelligence in corporate decision-making.

Details Unfold: ChatGPT's Role in a High-Stakes Legal Battle

The legal confrontation began with allegations from former Unknown Worlds executives, including Subnautica's designer and director, Charlie Cleveland, and co-founder Max McGuire, concerning unpaid bonuses tied to the acquisition of their studio. Early reports suggested Kim's use of an AI chatbot to find loopholes in these agreements. Initially, Krafton publicly refuted these claims, labeling them a diversionary tactic by the former executives to conceal their own alleged attempts to destroy evidence.

However, recent court transcripts from Kim's deposition tell a different narrative. When questioned about his actions upon learning that Cleveland and McGuire were not directly involved in Subnautica 2's development, Kim testified through a translator, "I started discussing this matter with various teams within the company to find—to figure out what we could do." He further elaborated, "So I talked to the legal team, the finance team, and the corporate team and the PR, all these various teams, and I also actually searched on ChatGPT to get faster answers to figure out what kind of rights we have."

Kim defended his decision to consult ChatGPT by equating it to using any other search engine, stating, "I think, just like everyone else, I am using ChatGPT to get faster answers or responses, just like Google search." Yet, further evidence presented during cross-examination revealed a more direct reliance on the AI. Lawyers representing the former Unknown Worlds principals highlighted a June 2 message from Kim to Maria Park, Krafton's head of corporate development, which included a ChatGPT link and referenced the AI's counsel directly. Kim's message conveyed, "Now, ChatGPT [is] start[ing] to answer that it is difficult to cancel the earn-out. If so, this is a contract under which we can only be dragged around."

The legal team also noted the subsequent deletion of this specific ChatGPT conversation, along with another concerning a "no-deal scenario," despite other AI interactions from the same period remaining intact. On redirect, Kim attributed these deletions to concerns about OpenAI potentially using confidential company information for learning purposes.

This situation becomes particularly intricate given Krafton's proactive "AI-first strategy," which, according to Kim, aims to "lead AI innovation across the gaming industry." The company's significant investment of $70 million in a GPU cluster to bolster its AI capabilities underscores its commitment to the technology. Nevertheless, the involvement of an AI chatbot in a matter of such financial magnitude—hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake, alongside the future of a potentially lucrative game—raises serious questions for shareholders and the public. The perceived inconsistency between Krafton's initial denial and Kim's later testimony, coupled with the deletion of pertinent AI queries, suggests a complex ethical landscape in the intersection of corporate governance and emerging AI technologies.

This unfolding saga prompts a vital discussion on the ethical boundaries of AI utilization in corporate governance. While AI tools like ChatGPT offer unprecedented efficiency for information retrieval and problem-solving, their application in critical legal and financial decisions demands transparency and accountability. The incident serves as a stark reminder that the integration of AI into corporate strategies must be accompanied by robust ethical frameworks and clear guidelines to prevent potential conflicts of interest and uphold stakeholder trust. The rapid evolution of AI necessitates a continuous re-evaluation of how human judgment and artificial intelligence can coexist responsibly within the business world.