Key Takeaways
- Elon Musk attempted a last‑minute settlement with OpenAI’s Greg Brockman two days before the trial, later threatening that Brockman and Sam Altman would become “the most hated men in America.”
- Brockman testified that his primary motivation remains the mission of safe artificial intelligence, not the $30 billion stake he now holds in the for‑profit arm of OpenAI.
- Musk’s lawsuit alleges that OpenAI abandoned its nonprofit pledge by pursuing commercial gain, seeking $150 billion in damages and the removal of Altman from the board.
- Evidence shown in court included Brockman’s 2015 email promising a $100,000 donation to OpenAI (which he never made) and journal entries from 2017‑18 discussing a possible shift to a for‑profit model to escape Musk’s influence.
- Expert witness Stuart Russell warned that the first company to achieve artificial general intelligence (AGI) could dominate global economic activity, rendering governments subordinate.
- The judge struck testimony from Musk’s family‑office manager Jared Birchall concerning a $97.4 billion bid for OpenAI’s assets, ruling he lacked personal knowledge of Altman’s role in the negotiations.
Background and Musk’s Settlement Overture
Two days before the blockbuster trial pitting Elon Musk against OpenAI commenced, Musk sent a text to Greg Brockman, OpenAI’s president and co‑founder, asking if he was interested in settling the case. When Brockman suggested that both sides drop their claims, Musk replied with a heated message: “By the end of this week, you and Sam will be the most hated men in America. If you insist, so it will be,” according to a document filed in the trial. This exchange set a combative tone for the proceedings that began in an Oakland, Calif., federal courthouse.
Brockman Takes the Stand: Defending Credibility
As the trial’s second week kicked off, Brockman spent most of the day on the witness stand defending his credibility against suggestions that his A.I. work was driven by greed. He appeared in a blue suit with his hair closely cropped, maintaining a calm demeanor while facing pointed questions from Musk’s lead lawyer, Steven Molo. The core of Brockman’s testimony was a reiteration that his primary motivation has always been the mission of building safe AI for humanity.
The $30 Billion Stake and Moral High Ground
Molo showed evidence that, although Brockman had never invested money in OpenAI, he now owned a stake worth about $30 billion after the company’s for‑profit restructuring. “Do you believe that OpenAI has maintained the moral high ground by allowing you to have a stake with close to $30 billion?” Molo pressed. Brockman replied that the stake resulted from the company’s structural change, not from personal profit‑seeking, and insisted that solving the mission remained his primary drive.
Musk’s Allegations and Demands
Musk’s lawsuit contends that Altman and other OpenAI founders breached the original nonprofit agreement by prioritizing commercial gain over the promise to share AI technology freely for the benefit of humanity. He is seeking $150 billion in damages, a court order removing Altman from the OpenAI board, and an injunction to unwind the for‑profit company structure adopted last year. Musk, who helped create OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015 alongside Altman, Brockman, and a group of AI researchers, left the organization after a power struggle and later founded his own AI venture, xAI.
Brockman’s Mission‑First Defense and the Mayer Email
When questioned about his motivations, Brockman stated, “Solving for the mission has always been my primary motivation. It remains so today.” Molo then highlighted a 2015 email Brockman sent to Yahoo’s then‑CEO Marissa Mayer, in which he wrote that he was donating $100,000 to the nascent OpenAI—a pledge he never fulfilled. “Did you think it was morally bankrupt to say you would donate $100,000 and then not do that?” Molo asked. Brockman answered, “No,” maintaining that the intention reflected his early commitment rather than a breach of ethics.
Journal Entries, Musk’s Departure, and the Fork in the Road
Molo repeatedly quoted from Brockman’s personal journal covering 2017‑18, a period when OpenAI’s co‑founders realized the nonprofit model could not raise the massive funds needed for advanced AI research. In the journal Brockman wrote, “This is the only chance we have to get out from Elon. Is he the ‘glorious leader’ that I would pick? We truly have a chance to make this happen. Financially, what will take me to $1B?” He explained that the entry reflected a strategic debate about whether to accept Musk’s terms or pursue a new direction. Brockman emphasized that he was weighing whether to continue building OpenAI with Musk or move the lab elsewhere, describing it as “a fork in the road.”
No Misleading Musk and Tesla’s AGI Ambitions
Under questioning from OpenAI’s lawyer Sarah Eddy, Brockman asserted that he had never misled Musk about his intentions with OpenAI. He recalled telling Brockman, as Musk was leaving the organization, that he intended to create a new effort to build artificial general intelligence (AGI) at Tesla—a machine capable of performing any task the human brain can do. When Eddy asked, “As far as you know, has Tesla ever been a nonprofit?” Brockman replied, “No,” underscoring the distinction between Musk’s for‑profit AI ambitions and OpenAI’s original nonprofit vision.
Expert Warning on AGI Dominance
The court also heard from Stuart Russell, a computer science professor at UC Berkeley specializing in AI safety. Russell warned that whichever company develops AGI first would gain a significant advantage that could compound over time. “That company — or a small handful of companies — may control a majority of economic activity on the planet, and governments would become subordinate to these companies,” he stated. His testimony underscored the broader societal stakes underlying Musk’s legal challenge.
Judge Strikes Birchall’s Testimony on the $97.4 Billion Bid
On Friday, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers dealt a blow to Musk’s case by striking portions of the testimony from Jared Birchall, who manages Musk’s family office. Birchall had discussed a $97.4 billion bid by Musk and others to purchase OpenAI’s assets last year, claiming he was concerned that Altman was improperly extracting value from the nonprofit while preparing a for‑profit entity for a potential public offering. The judge ruled that Birchall lacked personal knowledge of Altman’s involvement in those negotiations and ordered his discussion of the bid removed from the record. Birchall acknowledged he had arranged the bid with Marc Toberoff, one of Musk’s lawyers in the suit.
Contextual Note: Related Litigation
(The New York Times has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging copyright infringement of news content used to train AI systems; both companies have denied the claims.) This parallel lawsuit illustrates the growing legal scrutiny surrounding AI development and the tension between intellectual property rights and rapid technological advancement.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/04/technology/elon-musk-greg-brockman-openai-trial.html