The legal battle between Elon Musk and the co-founders of OpenAI is nearing a critical stage, with the case set to go to the jury on Monday after three weeks of hearings in Oakland that have focused heavily on the company’s transformation into a commercial artificial intelligence powerhouse.
The trial, widely viewed as Silicon Valley’s first major AI-related courtroom dispute, centres on whether OpenAI abandoned its original non-profit mission in favour of a profit-driven structure that now underpins one of the world’s most valuable private companies.
Elon Musk, who helped establish OpenAI in 2015, alleges that the organisation diverted from its founding principles after accepting early funding, including a $38 million contribution he says was intended to support a research-focused non-profit. He is now seeking to force the company to revert to that original structure, a move that could disrupt its planned initial public offering and its relationships with major investors, including Microsoft, Amazon and SoftBank.
The case has also highlighted the scale of OpenAI’s commercial rise. The company, which helped trigger the generative AI boom with the launch of ChatGPT in 2022, is now valued at roughly $850 billion, making it one of the most influential private technology firms globally.
In court, Musk argued that his early involvement was instrumental to the company’s foundation. “I came up with the idea and the name, recruited the key people, taught them everything I know, and provided all of the initial funding,” he said during his opening statement on 28 April. He added that his $38 million contribution had helped build what is now a multibillion-dollar enterprise.
He also criticised OpenAI’s evolution, saying he “gave $38 million essentially for nothing” and described himself as “literally an idiot” for what he characterised as misplaced trust in the organisation’s trajectory.
OpenAI’s leadership, including chief executive Sam Altman, has rejected Musk’s claims, arguing that the company’s shift was necessary to ensure access to capital and to compete in the rapidly evolving AI sector.
Altman, who testified during the trial, disputed Musk’s account of the company’s early governance and financing discussions. He alleged that Musk had previously pushed for a controlling stake, including a demand for “90 percent of the equity”, and had resisted formalising agreements in writing.
The proceedings also examined internal communications and past records from OpenAI’s leadership. Greg Brockman, the company’s president, was questioned about journal entries that referenced financial ambition and internal tensions around the company’s structure. He also described a 2017 confrontation with Musk, saying he feared physical escalation, though no violence occurred.
Another key witness, Shivon Zilis, a former OpenAI board member and Musk associate, was asked about her role as a link between Musk and OpenAI executives. Her testimony raised questions about whether Musk had prior knowledge of the company’s strategic direction before the breakdown in relations, a point that could influence the legal assessment of timing and liability.
The court has also heard arguments over whether Musk’s lawsuit was filed within the statutory time limit. That issue will be put to the jury in an advisory capacity, although the judge is expected to give it substantial weight.
Beyond procedural questions, the central issue for jurors is whether OpenAI’s founders misused Musk’s donation and breached commitments tied to its non-profit foundation by shifting towards a commercial structure.
If Musk succeeds, the ruling could force a structural overhaul of OpenAI, potentially affecting its planned public listing and its extensive partnerships with major technology and investment firms.
The case also raises broader implications for Microsoft, OpenAI’s largest private backer, with around $13 billion invested, as jurors are asked to consider whether it knowingly supported the company’s transition away from its original non-profit framework.
The outcome is expected to be closely watched across the global technology sector, where the balance between rapid commercialisation and governance of advanced artificial intelligence remains a central point of debate.
