For-profit vs. non-profit is an increasingly meaningless distinction in today's business/legal environment. It seems like more of a marketing ploy than anything else. For example, one can set up a 'socially responsible do-gooder' non-profit with the left hand, and a for-profit corporation with the right hand, and then funnel all the money that goes into the non-profit into the for-profit by making that the sole supplier to the non-profit, thus avoiding many taxes and generating robust profits. These schemes are legion - there are hundreds of examples if you go looking.
The real issue with LLMs is open-source vs. proprietary.
As someone who works at a non-profit that partners with various for-profits, I'm skeptical that the IRS would allow such sort of large-scale tax fraud to happen.
> "In this scenario, I set up my non-profit school-- and then I hire a profitable management company to run the school for me. The examples of this dodge are nearly endless... consider North Carolina businessman Baker Mitchell, who set up some non-profit charter schools and promptly had them buy and lease everything - from desks to computers to teacher training to the buildings and the land - from companies belonging to Baker Mitchell."
As far as the IRS, this may be entirely legal due to tax loopholes pushed through by lobbyists and bought politicians, or it may take so many IRS resources to unravel that it tends to go ignored.
The real issue with LLMs is open-source vs. proprietary.