Key takeaways from the OpenAI Trial as Elon Musk concluded his three-day testimony

7. AI

Elon Musk descended the witness stand on Thursday, concluding three days of combative and often personal testimony in the federal trial against OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman. The case, which could force the world’s leading AI company to revert to a non-profit structure, has laid bare the bitter ideological rift between the two former allies over the future of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).

"Stealing a charity” and “professional jealousy” accusations

Musk’s central argument throughout his testimony was that Altman and Greg Brockman "betrayed" a foundational agreement to keep OpenAI a non-profit, open-source organization. Musk repeatedly characterized OpenAI’s transition to a for-profit structure as a "bait and switch."

"It is not okay to steal a charity," Musk testified. "I could have started a for-profit from the beginning, but I specifically chose not to."

OpenAI’s lead counsel, William Savitt, countered that Musk’s lawsuit is motivated by "jealousy" over the company’s success after he left in 2018 following a failed takeover bid. Savitt highlighted emails suggesting Musk had once proposed merging OpenAI with Tesla to solve its massive capital needs.

The "speciesist" origin story

In a vivid recount of OpenAI’s birth, Musk testified that the company only exists because Google co-founder Larry Page called him a "speciesist" during a late-night argument.

"I asked Larry, 'What if AI wipes out all humans?' and he said that would be fine as long as intelligence survives," Musk said. "He called me a speciesist because I care about humans more than AI. OpenAI was meant to be the opposite of Google, an open-source, non-profit counterweight."

Recalls of bribes and betrayals

Musk described a late-2022 conversation with Altman regarding Microsoft’s $10 billion investment as a breaking point. When Altman allegedly offered Musk an opportunity to buy stock in the now-for-profit subsidiary, Musk told jurors it "frankly felt like a bribe" to ignore the company’s mission shift.

The "Terminator" intervention

Tensions peaked when the judge, Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, interjected to curb Musk’s "doomsday" rhetoric. When Musk invoked a "Terminator situation" where AI kills humanity, the judge admonished his legal team: "We are not going to talk much about extinction in this case... it’s ironic that your client, despite these risks, is creating a company [xAI] in the exact same space."

Contradictions and cross-examination

OpenAI's defense sought to paint Musk as a hypocrite, pointing out that his own AI firm, xAI, is a for-profit entity that recently used OpenAI’s models for "validation." Musk defended the move, stating it is "standard practice" to use other AIs for testing, and argued that for-profit companies can be socially beneficial as long as they don't start as a "charitable trust" and pivot later.

What’s Next

The trial, taking place in Oakland, California, is expected to last three weeks. With Musk’s testimony concluded, the focus shifts to Sam Altman and Greg Brockman, who are expected to take the stand next week. If the nine-person jury finds OpenAI liable, Judge Gonzalez Rogers will decide on a remedy, which could include the removal of current leadership or the undoing of the for-profit conversion, potentially derailing OpenAI’s planned $1 trillion IPO later this year.