Elon Musk vs Sam Altman: Closing Arguments Delivered In Landmark Case; Jury Decision Could Shape AI's Future

Lawyers for Elon Musk and OpenAI delivered closing arguments in a landmark trial whose outcome could influence the future of artificial intelligence.

Musk, a co-founder of OpenAI, sued the company in 2024. He accuses CEO Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman of betraying OpenAI’s original nonprofit mission by shifting toward a for-profit model. Musk invested about $38 million in OpenAI’s early years.

The trial’s stakes are high. A verdict in Musk’s favor could affect OpenAI’s planned initial public offering and broader power dynamics in the AI industry, including Musk’s own xAI and Anthropic. All three companies are preparing for major IPOs.

Timing of lawsuit emerges as key issue

A central question for the jury is whether Musk filed his lawsuit in time. OpenAI argues that he waited too long and cannot claim harms predating August 2021. The judge indicated that a jury finding on the statute of limitations could lead to a directed verdict for the defendants.

If the timing issue is cleared, jurors must determine whether OpenAI operated under a 'charitable trust' that was breached and whether Altman, Brockman, and the company unjustly enriched themselves. For co-defendant Microsoft, the jury will consider if it aided and abetted any breach.

Musk’s side attacks Altman’s credibility

Musk’s attorney Steven Molo focused on Altman’s trustworthiness, citing testimony from five witnesses, including Musk, former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, ex-CTO Mira Murati, and former board members Helen Toner and Tasha McCauley, who described Altman as a 'liar.'

Molo told jurors that Altman’s credibility is central, “If you cannot trust him, if you don’t believe him, they cannot win.” Because no formal contract established a charitable trust, Musk’s team pointed to emails, communications, OpenAI’s website, and public statements as evidence of the original mission.

OpenAI counters: Musk knew of for-profit plans

OpenAI attorney Sarah Eddy argued that Musk misrepresented events and that his testimony was contradicted by other witnesses. She said Musk knew about and initially supported plans for a for-profit arm to advance the company’s mission.

Eddy rejected the idea that Musk’s donations came with permanent strings, "Mr. Musk has come nowhere close to making that case." She referenced testimony suggesting Musk sought significant control, including discussions about his children inheriting influence over the company.

Altman and Brockman attended the proceedings in Oakland. Musk was in China with President Donald Trump and other executives. His lawyer noted Musk’s absence and expressed regret on his behalf.

The judge corrected statements regarding damages after Musk’s side suggested he was not seeking money. Musk previously dropped personal damages but continues to seek billions in disgorgement for OpenAI’s charitable efforts.

Outside the courthouse, protesters criticised both sides as billionaires prioritising profit over humanity, calling for stronger oversight of AI’s societal impacts. The jury is now deliberating after weeks of testimony that included high-profile figures from Silicon Valley.