Key Moments In Elon Musk Vs OpenAI Trial

The jury decided Musk waited too long to sue. Musk had sought about $150 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft, a major investor, to be paid to OpenAI's nonprofit. Musk also sought the removal of Altman and Brockman.

18 May 2026, 20:02 · NDTV

Elon Musk failed to convince a jury on Monday that OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman and President Greg Brockman broke their agreement to maintain the maker of ChatGPT as a nonprofit to benefit humanity.

The jury decided Musk waited too long to sue. Musk had sought about $150 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft, a major investor, to be paid to OpenAI's nonprofit. Musk also sought the removal of Altman and Brockman.

Below are key moments from the three-week trial:

OLD CLAIMS

The OpenAI defendants had argued that Musk knew years ago about plans to create a for-profit entity to help raise investment and funding needed to develop artificial intelligence.

Musk had a three-year statute of limitations to sue, and OpenAI's lawyers said his August 2024 lawsuit came too late because he knew several years earlier about OpenAI's growth plans. Sarah Eddy, a lawyer for the OpenAI defendants, said Musk should have filed the lawsuit in August 2021. On Monday, the jury unanimously sided with OpenAI, ending the trial.

CAN'T STEAL A CHARITY

Musk repeatedly described OpenAI as a charity and accused Altman and Brockman of abandoning the company's mission to be a benevolent steward of AI for humanity and transforming the nonprofit into a profit-seeking juggernaut.

"It was specifically meant to be for a charity that does not benefit any individual person. I could've started it as a for-profit and I specifically chose not to," Musk testified. "There's nothing wrong with having a for-profit organization, you just can't steal a charity."

"If we make it OK to loot a charity, the entire foundation of charitable giving in America will be destroyed," Musk testified on the first day of the trial. "That's my concern."

BATTLE FOR CONTROL

The OpenAI defendants disputed Musk's claim that he wanted OpenAI to remain a nonprofit and tried to portray Musk as motivated by a desire to take control of OpenAI. "What he cares about is Elon Musk being on top," William Savitt, a lawyer for OpenAI and Altman, said in his opening statement. "We are here because Mr. Musk didn't get his way."

Altman recalled Musk once demanding a 90% stake in OpenAI and also proposing a merger between OpenAI and Musk's electric car company Tesla, which Musk said would have provided the massive funding OpenAI needed.

OpenAI's chairman, Bret Taylor, testified that the company received a formal takeover offer from a consortium led by Musk's rival company xAI in February 2025, six months after Musk sued. "I was surprised," Taylor said. "This proposal was to acquire this nonprofit by a group of for-profit investors, which felt contradictory to the spirit of the lawsuit."

MONEY FOR MARS

Brockman testified that Musk's real aim was control of OpenAI to help him raise the enormous sums he needed to establish a colony on Mars.

"He said he needed $80 billion to create a city" on the red planet, Brockman said.

The board of SpaceX, which Musk founded, approved in January a plan to award Musk 200 million super-voting restricted shares if its market value reaches $7.5 trillion and it creates a permanent colony on Mars with at least 1 million people, according to a securities filing.

'WE ALL COULD DIE'

Musk testified that he learned from discussions with Larry Page that the Google founder lacked concern about AI safety, which led to the creation of OpenAI. Musk testified that he asked Page what would happen if AI wiped out humans. "He said that would be fine so long as artificial intelligence survives. I said that was insane, that's just crazy."

The two legal teams sparred before the trial over Musk's interest in questioning an expert witness about extinction risk of AI, something OpenAI opposed. "Extinction risk is a real problem. This is a real risk. We all could die," said Musk's lawyer Steven Molo.

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers limited the scope of the expert's testimony and said that she thought "it's ironic that your client, despite these risks, is creating a company that's in the exact space."

ATTACKS ON CREDIBILITY

In his closing argument, Musk's lawyer Steven Molo told jurors that five witnesses, including Musk, former OpenAI board members and former OpenAI Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever, testified that Altman was a liar.

Molo also noted that during cross-examination, Altman did not say yes unequivocally when asked if he was completely trustworthy and did not mislead people in business. "Sam Altman's credibility is directly at issue in this case," Molo said.

The OpenAI defendants attacked Musk's claims that his early role and contributions were essential to the company's success.

"Mr. Musk may have the Midas touch in some areas, but not in AI," said William Savitt, a lawyer for OpenAI. "To succeed in AI, as it turns out, all Mr. Musk can do is come to court."

The OpenAI defendants argued that what Musk wanted was control and he was told in 2017 that OpenAI would need financing that came with being a for-profit. Savitt accused Musk of having "selective amnesia."

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Show full article

Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world