Faster than expected —something especially uncommon when talking about legal processes— the trial pitting two of the internet kings, Elon Musk and Sam Altman, is advancing without brakes. Jury selection took place on Monday, and for this Tuesday, the first official day of the case in the Oakland courts, opening statements from both sides were expected. But the matter is moving so quickly that one of the most juicy main witnesses has already taken the stand: the plaintiff himself, Elon Musk.
Read more Reunion of the pioneers of EL PAÍS: “We had a will for public service”
At noon on Tuesday, in the Californian courtroom, Musk spoke for a couple of hours about the foundational history of OpenAI and his role in it. Above all, he presented a clear vision. “It is not right to steal from a non-profit company,” was one of his first sentences, leaving no doubt as to where his speech was headed. Because the entire case revolves around that concept. Musk argues that when he decided to invest in the seed of OpenAI in 2015, a pioneer in the development of artificial intelligence, he was doing so in an entity that went beyond profit and sought the common good. That is why in 2024 he sued its main leaders, Sam Altman and Greg Brockman, and OpenAI’s new partner, the giant Microsoft, to demand that it regain its philanthropic spirit. And, incidentally, that they compensate him with 150 billion dollars (around 128 billion euros), which he assures he will donate to charitable organizations.
In the opening statements, the lawyers for the defendant OpenAI (mother of the famous ChatGPT) have stated that the entire complaint is based on Musk, who participated in the company’s origins, “not getting his way” with the company and that all of this is nothing more than “a harassment lawsuit.” So Musk’s own lawyers played their main card and called him to testify. The richest man in the world spoke about his career, both inside and outside OpenAI, where he claims he actively participated in creating it as an alternative to Google, and that he worked throughout its process, from securing funding to hiring staff. He also grandiloquently articulated his repeated idea of how his interests go beyond money and are focused on the good of humanity through his ideas and business ventures.
All this to maintain that same discourse: that OpenAI must return to operating “for the benefit of humanity,” as he stated in his complaint two years ago and as he maintains he has always wanted. However, there are emails from 2015 and 2017 —he left the company in 2018— that show how he agreed with Brockman, co-founder and current president of the tech company, for OpenAI to transition from a non-profit to a for-profit company. Now, he claims he intended it to have “a small profit.”
Sam Altman has become his arch-enemy —in fact, he wants him to stop being the head of OpenAI— and he has presented himself as the great global technological savior. The head of SpaceX has stated that he has great concerns about generative artificial intelligence, its uses and its future, as he believes that AI will soon surpass human technical capabilities. In contrast, he believes that Altman is not being careful enough with the great risks of this technology. “I have extreme concern about AI,” he stated, as reported by CNN. He has painted a black-and-white picture because AI, he claims, has only two paths: either be good for humanity or be destructive: “It could kill us all. We don’t want a Terminator scenario.”
The founder of Tesla plays big, as is characteristic of him. He has tried to show that the case goes beyond OpenAI itself, and that this is a historic trial that will set the standard for numerous charitable organizations and also technology companies. Hence, he has stated that if Altman, 41, were to win, it “would give free rein to a looting of every charitable organization in the United States,” as explained by The New York Times, another media outlet present in the courtroom. “The consequences of this case go far beyond me or all of us here. The entire foundation of philanthropy in the United States would be destroyed.”
Read more The right-wing parties overturn the rental decree amid criticism of the PSOE from its left
Musk will conclude his testimony on Wednesday, and then Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will call Jared Birchall, an executive at xAi and Neuralink and manager of Musk’s wealth, to the stand.
It remains to be seen what Altman and Brockman will say on the stand, but everything indicates that their story will be diametrically opposed to the one painted by Musk. Other important witnesses will also come to tell their versions, such as Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella; former Neuralink executive (Musk’s neurotechnology company) and part of the OpenAI board, as well as mother of at least four of Musk’s children, Shivon Zilis; Mira Murati, former OpenAI technology chief; or robotic engineer Tasha McCauley, who was part of the company’s board and participated in the brief attempt to depose Sam Altman from the company in 2023.
Among Musk’s main arguments is that if OpenAI’s model is not reversed and transformed into a charitable entity as it was in its origins, the same could happen with almost any charitable company. However, experts point out that this is not so simple, and that the case does not necessarily have to be replicated in other companies, and that in fact, just reversing OpenAI’s business structure would be complex and an uncommon mandate for a court.
The jury, made up of nine people chosen by Judge Rogers (who will deliver the final verdict), will have much to consider in these four weeks. If Musk wins, he could obtain those 150 billion dollars, which it is unclear what causes he would allocate them to, and he would seem to have a much freer path to develop his own artificial intelligence company, xAI. In contrast, if Altman emerges victorious, it would be a boost for his business model in general and for his company in particular, which is valued at 730 billion dollars (about 623 billion euros) and is preparing for its anticipated IPO.
Read more PSG — Bayern Munich, live | Bayern controls the match in the first minutes
