Elon Musk is suing to force OpenAI back into a nonprofit structure, arguing that Sam Altman and Greg Brockman transformed a charity into a for-profit venture worth hundreds of billions of dollars. The billionaire took the stand in a landmark trial that could fundamentally reshape how artificial intelligence companies operate and whether founders can pivot away from their original missions.

What Exactly Is Musk Accusing OpenAI Of?

Musk's core argument is straightforward: OpenAI was founded in 2015 as a nonprofit organization with a shared vision to develop AI for humanity's benefit. When Altman and Brockman proposed converting it to a for-profit structure to attract venture capital funding, Musk objected. He left the organization in 2018 and has now filed a lawsuit demanding that the court remove Altman and Brockman from their positions and restore OpenAI as a full nonprofit.

"Fundamentally I think they're going to try to make this lawsuit seem complicated. But I think it's very simple, which is, it's not OK to steal a charity," Musk said as he began his testimony.

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX

The lawsuit, first filed in 2024, centers on whether the creation of a for-profit arm that now owns ChatGPT violates laws governing charitable organizations. OpenAI has raised billions in funding from investors and is now valued at hundreds of billions of dollars, making it one of Silicon Valley's most influential companies and a leader in the AI revolution.

How Is OpenAI Defending Itself Against These Claims?

OpenAI's defense paints a very different picture of events. The company argues that Musk is motivated by jealousy and a desire to sabotage a competitor to his own AI firm, xAI Corp., which developed the chatbot Grok. In court filings, OpenAI stated that Musk "wasn't really involved in developing the company's technology" and "didn't understand artificial intelligence very well".

The company also contends that Musk demanded significant control and equity when the for-profit transition was proposed. According to OpenAI's chief lawyer Bill Savitt, Musk left the organization after Altman and Brockman refused to give him control over both the company and its technology. Microsoft, which is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, has argued that its investments in OpenAI "helped to fund one of the largest nonprofits in the world" and were "necessary for OpenAI to pursue its mission".

• Musk's Position: He was the central figure who founded OpenAI, provided initial funding, recruited top AI researchers, and convinced Microsoft to become the first major backer in 2019. He left when the nonprofit-to-for-profit transition was proposed.
• OpenAI's Position: Musk was not heavily involved in day-to-day operations or technology development. He demanded control and equity, and left when his demands were rejected, not because of principled objections to the business model.
• Microsoft's Position: Its investments were essential to OpenAI's ability to pursue its mission and helped fund one of the world's largest nonprofits.

What Does Musk Say About His Motivations?

Musk's lawyer, Steve Molo, presented his client as a "genius technologist" motivated by a desire to improve humanity's well-being, not by greed. Musk emphasized that he has no yachts and is focused on solving problems that make people's lives better. He described SpaceX as "life insurance for life as we know it" and Tesla as a response to humanity's need to reduce fossil fuel dependency.

Musk

Regarding artificial intelligence, Musk expressed long-standing concerns about the technology's dual nature. He characterized AI as a "double-edged sword" that could either "solve all the diseases and make everyone prosperous, or it could kill us all." He framed his vision for AI development as a choice between a utopian "Star Trek future" or a dystopian "Terminator"-style world, and said he wants to help build the former.

"I don't have any yachts. I like working and solving problems that make people's lives better," Musk stated during his testimony.

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX

What Are the Key Details About the Trial Itself?

The trial is expected to last approximately three weeks and will feature testimony from multiple influential tech figures, including Altman, Brockman, and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. Musk was the first witness called. The case has attracted significant public attention, with dozens of supporters and members of the public lining up outside the courthouse early on the first day, some wearing "Stop AI" t-shirts.

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a strict order before the trial began: both Musk and Altman are prohibited from discussing the case on social media. This is a notable restriction given that the two entrepreneurs regularly criticize each other publicly online. Both agreed to comply with the order.

The trial's focus is narrow but consequential. It centers on the original agreements and commitments made by the cofounders shortly after OpenAI's founding in 2015, and whether the creation of a for-profit subsidiary that is now worth hundreds of billions of dollars violates laws governing charitable organizations. The outcome could set a precedent for how AI companies and other technology startups handle transitions from nonprofit to for-profit structures.

Why Does This Trial Matter Beyond the Courtroom?

The case raises fundamental questions about the governance of AI development and whether founders can pivot away from their original missions once a company gains significant value. If Musk prevails, it could force OpenAI to restructure and potentially limit the ability of other AI companies to transition to for-profit models. If OpenAI wins, it would establish that such transitions are permissible even when they dramatically shift a company's structure and financial incentives.

The trial also highlights the tension between Musk's xAI and OpenAI's ChatGPT in the competitive AI landscape. Musk's Grok chatbot represents his attempt to build an alternative to OpenAI's dominant AI products. The lawsuit, whether motivated by principle or competition, underscores the high stakes and personal tensions within the AI industry's most prominent figures.