The lawsuit filed by Tesla CEO and world's wealthiest individual, Elon Musk, against ChatGPT's parent company OpenAI, its CEO Sam Altman, and President Greg Brockman, entered a critical phase in its core trial proceedings from April 28 to April 30 at the Oakland Federal Court in California, according to multiple foreign media reports.
Musk testified in court for three consecutive days, with his total testimony exceeding seven hours, marking the most closely watched aspect of this litigation phase. His three-day testimony has now concluded.
This lawsuit, spanning the original intent of corporate founding, charitable trust obligations, and the boundaries of commercializing artificial intelligence, not only involves claims amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars but is also regarded by the industry as a landmark case for defining governance rules for global AI institutions.
The origins of the event trace back to OpenAI's founding in 2015. Initially positioned as a non-profit AI research lab, its founding principle was to benefit humanity with Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) without a profit-making motive. Musk, as a co-founder, was deeply involved in the project and contributed approximately $38 million in early startup funding.
In 2018, due to disagreements over AI safety philosophies, Musk stepped down from the board of directors. Subsequently, he repeatedly publicly criticized OpenAI for pursuing profits and forgetting its original purpose.
In 2019, OpenAI transitioned from a non-profit organization to a "capped-profit" company, a hybrid of for-profit and non-profit structures where shareholder returns are limited to no more than 100 times the original investment. By the end of 2022, OpenAI released ChatGPT, rapidly becoming one of the world's hottest startups.
In 2024, Musk formally initiated the lawsuit in a California court, naming Altman, Brockman, and Microsoft as defendants. He accused the management of abandoning the initial non-profit commitment, using the shell of a public benefit organization to turn towards commercial profit-making, thereby violating charitable trust responsibilities.
After multiple legal motions and evidence exchanges in 2025, the case proceeded to trial in late April 2026 following jury selection. During the trial, Musk voluntarily withdrew fraud-related allegations, focusing the dispute on two core issues: whether OpenAI breached its founding public-benefit promise and violated its fiduciary duties.
Key points from the testimony are as follows:
Musk characterized OpenAI as a "charity." The 2015 blog post announcing the establishment of OpenAI, the non-profit AI research organization, did not contain the word "charity." However, Musk repeatedly referred to OpenAI as a charity during the trial and testified that Altman and Brockman breached their initial promise to maintain a non-profit model.
Musk testified: "OpenAI was clearly established from the beginning as a charity serving the public, not allowed to profit any individual. I could have founded it as a for-profit company, but I explicitly chose the non-profit model."
Musk stated, "Without me, there would be no OpenAI." Establishing an AI research lab requires both top talent and massive computational resources. Musk claimed that OpenAI relied entirely on his resources for both personnel and funding.
"I conceived the idea, finalized the organization's name, recruited the core team, shared my knowledge extensively, and provided all the startup capital," Musk stated. He mentioned poaching top researcher Ilya Sutskever from Google, noting that Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin repeatedly tried to retain this key talent.
Admitted awareness of for-profit transition discussions but did not read details. During cross-examination, William Savitt, the attorney representing OpenAI, Altman, and Brockman, pressed Musk on whether he was aware of early discussions about OpenAI transitioning to a for-profit model and if he had read the term sheet forwarded by Altman on August 31, 2017, which detailed a shift from non-profit to a "for-profit entity under non-profit oversight."
Musk responded: "My testimony is that I did not read the details, only the title."
Musk stated that although he was aware of the discussions, he had received explicit assurances from Altman that OpenAI would adhere to its non-profit nature.
Legal demands: Seeking hundreds of billions in damages and restoration of non-profit structure. Musk alleged that Altman and others, by promising to build a non-profit institution prioritizing AI safety, deceived him into contributing $38 million in donations and personal assistance, only to later pivot to creating a for-profit entity for personal gain.
He presented two core demands in the lawsuit: first, claiming damages between $130 billion and $150 billion; second, requesting the court to order OpenAI to revert to a non-profit structure and replace the current management.
Controversy over AI safety and existential risk. Musk reiterated his safety concerns regarding AGI in his testimony, stating that AI controlled by untrustworthy parties poses an existential threat to humanity. He said that part of his reason for leaving the OpenAI board in 2018 was concern over the organization's safety direction, and OpenAI's subsequent development trajectory confirmed his initial worries.
In a blog post published on May 1, OpenAI wrote, "Driven by jealousy, regret over leaving OpenAI, and a desire to hinder a competitor, Musk has harassed OpenAI for years through baseless lawsuits and public attacks."
OpenAI claimed that the core motive behind Musk's lawsuit is a desire to control OpenAI, stemming from dissatisfaction with the company's growth after his 2018 board departure, and an attempt to generate momentum for his own AI venture, xAI. They also pointed out that Musk did not prioritize AI safety work during his tenure.
Analysis widely suggests that the impact of this case extends far beyond a typical corporate dispute. It will not only directly determine OpenAI's future governance path and development direction but also redefine the legal boundaries for commercializing AI institutions with non-profit backgrounds. If Musk prevails, OpenAI's governance structure and potential IPO path could undergo fundamental reshaping. If he loses, it would further solidify the profit-oriented transformation led by Altman.
Following the trial schedule, key figures including Altman and Brockman are expected to testify in the coming days. The overall trial process is anticipated to last until mid-May, with the jury's verdict to be announced subsequently.
Comments