The most consequential trial in AI history opened Tuesday in a federal courtroom in Oakland, California. Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, took the stand to accuse OpenAI co-founder and CEO Sam Altman of betraying the nonprofit they built together and stealing a charity in the process. Altman sat quietly a few rows behind his legal team as Musk spoke. The two men had not shared a room like this in years.
How Musk and Altman built OpenAI and why it collapsed
Musk and Altman met through a mutual Silicon Valley investor in 2012. By 2015, after weeks of conversations, they had agreed to found OpenAI as a nonprofit research lab devoted to building artificial intelligence safely and sharing it openly with the world. Their founding motivation, according to Musk’s testimony, crystallised in a conversation with Google co-founder Larry Page, who reportedly told Musk that AI wiping out humanity would be fine as long as artificial intelligence survived. Page then called Musk a “specieist” for caring more about humans than digital life forms.
“The reason OpenAI exists is because Larry Page called me a ‘specieist,'” Musk told the jury. He described his goal as building a counterweight to Google — one without a profit motive, freely sharing its technology with the world. He claimed he conceived the idea and the name, recruited the core team, and secured the initial funding. OpenAI’s lawyers dispute all of that.
The for-profit pivot at the heart of the OpenAI lawsuit
By 2017, it was clear that building frontier AI would cost far more than a nonprofit could raise. Discussions began internally about attaching a for-profit entity to the original nonprofit structure. Musk was part of those conversations. Emails submitted as evidence show his own chiefs of staff discussing a 55% stake for him in any for-profit structure, with Altman receiving just 7.5%. Musk testified he was not opposed to a for-profit “adjunct” as long as it was not “the tail wagging the dog.”
What happened next depends entirely on who you ask. Musk says Altman and the other founders refused to hand him control and deceived him about the company’s direction. OpenAI says Musk wanted to be CEO with absolute power, tried to fold the company into Tesla when refused, and walked out in early 2018. “Guys, I’ve had enough,” he wrote in an email to the group before his departure.
Thirteen months after Musk left, OpenAI created its first for-profit subsidiary. Microsoft eventually invested $10 billion. By the time ChatGPT launched in late 2022 and ignited the global AI boom, OpenAI had become a company worth over $730 billion — and Musk was nowhere near it.
What Musk and OpenAI told the jury on day one
Opening statements on Tuesday drew two sharply different portraits of the same events. Musk’s lead counsel, Steven Molo, accused Altman and Brockman of stealing a charity, likening the situation to a museum store that has taken over the museum. He argued that Musk had donated at least $44 million to OpenAI on the understanding it would serve the public good, not enrich its founders.
OpenAI’s lead counsel, William Savitt, offered a simpler framing. “We are here because Mr. Musk didn’t get his way at OpenAI,” he told the jury. “My clients had the nerve to go on and succeed without him.” Savitt pointed out that Musk raised no objection when Microsoft made its first $1 billion investment in 2019, and began challenging OpenAI’s mission only after ChatGPT made it the most talked-about company in tech.
He also noted that Musk launched xAI, his own for-profit AI company, in 2023. Microsoft, named as a co-defendant, denied any wrongdoing. Its counsel said the company had been “a responsible partner every step of the way.”
A gag order, a firebomb and an unusual witness list
Before the first witness was sworn in, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers called Musk to the bench. On Monday, before jury selection was complete, Musk had posted more than two dozen times on X, repeatedly calling Altman “Scam Altman” and accusing him of stealing a charity. The judge told Musk his posts would “only make things worse” and threatened a gag order. Both agreed to keep their social media activity to a minimum.
Jury selection had already been tense. Lawyers for Musk struck several prospective jurors who had called their client “greedy” or “a piece of garbage.” One prospective juror noted that their partner’s job had been harmed by DOGE, the government cost-cutting initiative Musk ran under the Trump administration. The nine jurors ultimately seated said they held largely neutral views of Musk or of AI.
The trial also carries some unusual details. Shivon Zilis, a former OpenAI board member and mother of four of Musk’s children, is on the witness list. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, former OpenAI chief technology officer Mira Murati, and OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever are also expected to testify. Security at the courthouse has been heightened after a man was arrested for throwing a firebomb at Altman’s San Francisco home.
What the verdict means for AI and OpenAI’s planned IPO
The stakes extend well beyond the two men in that courtroom. A Musk win could force OpenAI to revert to a nonprofit structure, remove Altman and Brockman from their roles, and redistribute what his lawyers call more than $150 billion in wrongful gains. That outcome would gut a key competitor while Musk’s own xAI — now folded into SpaceX ahead of what could be a $1.75 trillion IPO — benefits directly.
If Musk loses, Altman consolidates control of the most valuable AI company in the world, freeing it to pursue a public listing that analysts say could value the company at close to $1 trillion. The nine-person jury will deliver an advisory verdict to Judge Gonzalez Rogers, who then decides on remedies. A decision is possible as early as mid-May.
Musk returns to the stand Wednesday morning for cross-examination. Lets see how this pans out.
