cfaa heavily relies on intent for prosecution (hence why researchers arent typically locked up). it would be difficult to argue that openai intended to hack other companies.
there's probably better/more likely to succeed avenues to pursue rather than the cfaa
Just like boeing's execs didn't intend for their planes to fall out of the sky? I guess they didn't get in trouble either.
Mens rea is often established through circumstantial evidence.
Repeatedly doing something that results in a specific outcome, even if that outcome is not explicitly specified or requested as the preferred outcome, can still be evidence of intent.
They could make that argument the first time it happened but the next time or the fifth time I don't see how they can still credibaly claim to not know that the computer they control was going to do that