The legal dispute between Tesla CEO Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman commenced on April 27 in a California court, marking a significant conflict between two major US tech figures. After providing testimony for three consecutive days, Musk concluded his court appearance on Thursday, April 30.
Musk has accused Altman and OpenAI President Greg Brockman of deviating from OpenAI's founding mission as a "non-profit research institution" and transforming the artificial intelligence (AI) company into a for-profit entity, leading to what he terms "illegal enrichment." Musk has also named Microsoft as a co-defendant, alleging the company aided and abetted OpenAI's shift in direction.
The trial is anticipated to last approximately four weeks. Besides Musk and Altman, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, along with several current and former OpenAI board members and leading AI researchers, may also testify.
In this lawsuit, Musk is seeking over $150 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft. He has stated that he does not want any money for himself; instead, he requests that all awarded damages be deposited into an account of a charity under OpenAI. Additionally, his demands include reverting OpenAI to a non-profit status, removing Altman and Brockman from their positions at OpenAI, and expelling Altman from the company's board.
Substantial information has been disclosed during the proceedings, revealing details about the relationship between the tech leaders. Musk, a co-founder of OpenAI who provided tens of millions of dollars in investment, accused Altman and Brockman of deceiving him into providing funds. "I was a fool to give them money for free to start a company," Musk stated, explaining that he initially believed he was donating to a non-profit organization aimed at ensuring AI benefits humanity.
OpenAI's side contends that the lawsuit is essentially a tactic by "Musk to suppress a competitor," intended to benefit his own AI company. It was reported that Musk's AI company previously launched Grok as a competitor to ChatGPT. Musk acknowledged in court that his AI company indeed used OpenAI's models to train Grok.
The court proceedings have brought numerous key pieces of evidence to light. For instance, it was revealed that Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang provided OpenAI with a highly sought-after supercomputer; Altman initially sought support from the tech startup investment firm Y Combinator to develop OpenAI; and Brockman had longstanding concerns about the extent of Musk's control over OpenAI.
Submitted email correspondence presented as evidence suggests that Musk's private communications with Altman may differ from his public statements on social media. A 2023 email record shows Altman telling Musk, "You are my hero. But it hurts me that you are attacking OpenAI." Musk replied, "I'm sorry, that was not my intent, but civilization is at stake."
A document acknowledged by both parties also revealed that Musk once donated four Tesla vehicles and upgrade packages to OpenAI. When questioned about this, Musk clarified that he actually gifted the Tesla cars to individuals, not to the company OpenAI itself. "I paid the full price myself and gave them to individuals as a form of reward," he explained.
On April 29 and 30, Musk underwent cross-examination by OpenAI's lead defense attorney, William Savitt. During this session, Savitt's persistent questioning reportedly caused Musk to become visibly frustrated on multiple occasions. It is noteworthy that Savitt and Musk have a complex history; Savitt has previously represented Musk and Tesla in a securities fraud lawsuit and has also represented Twitter in litigation against Musk.
Savitt questioned Musk in court about his awareness of early discussions regarding OpenAI's potential shift to a for-profit model. He presented Musk with email and text message records indicating that in 2018, Altman attempted to inform Musk about plans for "OpenAI to secure funding from Microsoft." The email included a term sheet outlining a proposed corporate structure transformation, a purported four-page document involving changing OpenAI from a non-profit to a "for-profit entity under the supervision of a non-profit." Regarding this term sheet, Musk stated in court, "I didn't read the specific terms carefully, I just glanced at the title."
Savitt then referenced testimony suggesting Musk had stated several times that he "had not seen" the list, but also several times that he "had reviewed it carefully." Savitt continued to press, asking Musk to provide any communication records from 2018 or 2019 showing he had opposed the terms outlined in the list.
According to media present, this line of questioning made Musk noticeably impatient, and he raised his voice while reprimanding Savitt. Musk reiterated that he was not opposed to a non-profit organization having a limited-scale for-profit subsidiary. Savitt explicitly stated that this was not the question he was asking.
Elizabeth Lopatto, a reporter for the tech media outlet The Verge who was in the courtroom, recalled that Musk seemed to be trying to portray himself as a "country CEO deceived by a big-city lawyer" during the cross-examination, but she doubted anyone would believe that characterization. Lopatto even noted that she found herself feeling unprecedented sympathy for Altman during the proceedings.
Reports indicate that before the cross-examination concluded, Musk testified that after OpenAI's agreement with Microsoft was finalized, he told Altman in 2020 that he felt everything had become hypocritical, adding, "I told him to at least change OpenAI's name." Musk claimed that Altman assured him the mission would continue, which is why he did not file the lawsuit at that time.
Comments