As spotted on The New York Times, a federal jury sided with OpenAI and Sam Altman after deliberating for less than two hours, rejecting claims brought by Elon Musk over the company’s shift from nonprofit roots into a for-profit AI powerhouse. Musk had been trying to paint himself as the betrayed co-founder who watched OpenAI abandon its original purpose in favor of money and corporate partnerships.
The lawsuit has been brewing for a minute now. Musk first sued OpenAI back in 2024, accusing Altman, OpenAI president Greg Brockman, and even Microsoft of basically turning the company into a cash machine instead of the “open” research-focused organization it originally claimed to be. Musk wanted damages, leadership changes, and even tried to stop OpenAI’s restructuring plans altogether.
According to reports from the courtroom, OpenAI’s legal team argued Musk knew for years that the company was moving toward a for-profit structure and even supported some of those conversations early on. That argument apparently landed because the jury ultimately decided Musk waited too long to bring the claims in the first place.
Of course, this whole thing isn’t just about principles and ethics. The tension between Musk and OpenAI has been escalating ever since the explosive rise of ChatGPT turned OpenAI into one of the biggest names in tech while Musk launched his own competing AI company, xAI. At this point, the courtroom drama feels less like “protecting humanity” and more like two billionaires fighting over who gets to control the future of AI.
During the trial, some spicy details also surfaced about Musk allegedly trying to gain greater control over OpenAI years ago before stepping away from the company. OpenAI’s side reportedly argued Musk became hostile once he realized he would not be running the operation his way.
Of course, Musk is not done. After the ruling, he hopped on X and wrote, “Regarding the OpenAI case, the judge & jury never actually ruled on the merits, but rather on a timing technicality. We will appeal to the Ninth Circuit. There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Sam Altman lied under oath.”
