Musk v. Altman live updates: Tesla CEO spars with OpenAI attorney over company's evolution

Elon Musk clashed with a defense attorney Wednesday during cross-examination in his federal trial over OpenAI's origins, with repeated courtroom tension, judicial intervention and disputes over early company emails and structure.

Elon Musk clashed with a defense attorney Wednesday during cross-examination in his federal trial over OpenAI's origins, with repeated courtroom tension, judicial intervention and disputes over early company emails and structure.

Musk, who was being questioned for a second day on the witness stand, pushed back against questions from defense attorney William Savitt, arguing at times that they were misleading.

At one point, Musk told Savitt his questions were "not a simple yes or no" and were "designed to trick me," prompting continued back-and-forth between the two. He also said some of the e-mails and messages he was asked about in court were difficult to recall as they were many years ago.

The exchanges escalated enough for Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to intervene several times, instructing both sides to stop speaking over one another so the jurors could hear what they were saying and also so the court reporter could transcribe.

Savitt, who previously represented Twitter in its legal battle with Musk over his $44 billion takeover of the company, is now part of the defense team representing OpenAI.

The case centers on Musk's claim that OpenAI deviated from its founding mission as a nonprofit created to benefit humanity. Musk helped found the company in 2015 and invested roughly $38 million.

He alleges the organization shifted away from its original charitable purpose as it moved toward a more commercial structure. Musk has argued the company should have remained under nonprofit control and has accused OpenAI leadership of straying from its founding commitments.

Defense attorneys, however, have pointed to emails, text messages and deposition testimony they say show Musk was aware of and at times supported discussions about alternative corporate structures, including arrangements involving for-profit entities supporting nonprofit work.

In court, Savitt presented several pieces of evidence he argued showed Musk's early proposals envisioned him holding significant control.

Musk argued that control would have decreased as the company brought in additional investors and board members

The defense has argued the dispute is ultimately about control and competition in the artificial intelligence industry, alleging Musk became critical of OpenAI only after losing influence and later launching his own AI company, xAI. Savitt questioned Musk on his reasonings for cutting off quarterly funding in 2017, wondering if it was to force "financial pressure" on a company he felt he couldn't gain
control of.

Savitt said the evidence "is not as how Mr. Musk has described them," referencing what he characterized as a broader documentary record of early discussions and agreements.

Musk has maintained he was never opposed to a for-profit structure so long as profits are capped and the organization continues to serve its original nonprofit mission. He has also accused OpenAI leadership of abandoning that mission and has described himself as having been misled.

The defense, meanwhile, has portrayed Musk as a founder who became dissatisfied after failing to secure control and later withdrew financial support as tensions escalated.

Musk is expected to return to the stand Wednesday to complete cross-examination. Two additional witnesses are expected to follow and then next up: defendant and OpenAI Greg Brockman.

Elon Musk took the stand for a second day of testimony against OpenAI and its leaders in a lawsuit that could reshape the future of artificial intelligence, as the emerging technology has sent ripples through the economy and financial markets.

Musk claims OpenAI betrayed its initial nonprofit mission when it changed its corporate structure; OpenAI, for its part, claims Musk's suit is meant to derail its position as a competitor to his own artificial intelligence company, xAI.

In court, email exchanges between Musk and Altman were shown.

On one e-mail exchange between the two about the non-profit structure, Musk reflects: "I was foolish enough to believe him.'

Musk said he received reassurances that OpenAI would remain non-profit and continued to donate over what he estimates was $10 million.

Musk said he expects AI to be "smarter than any human" as soon as next year. Musk said a longstanding concern about AI is the question of what happens when computers become much smarter than humans.

Musk was called as the first witness shortly after noon, following opening statements from attorneys for OpenAI and Microsoft. When questioned by his own legal team, Musk said the defendants were trying to complicate this case.

He told jurors that, in his view, the case could set a precedent that risks losing every charity in America, adding that the consequences "go far beyond me."

Once sworn in, Musk spent much of the first part of his testimony walking jurors through his personal background. He described moving to North America because he wanted to be part of the technology industry, and recalled early jobs as a lumberjack and restaurant server before his first business ventures.

Musk then outlined the origins of companies he later founded or led, including PayPal, SpaceX and Tesla. He said SpaceX was created to make life multiplanetary and preserve human consciousness, while Tesla grew out of his belief that electric vehicles were essential for the future. He also briefly discussed Neurolink and The Boring Company, telling jurors he works 80 to 100 hours a week and does not take vacations.

"No vacation homes, no yachts or anything," Musk said.

About 30 minutes into his testimony, Musk turned to artificial intelligence. He explained artificial general intelligence, or AGI, as a point where AI becomes as smart or smarter than any human.

"I think we are getting close to that point," Musk said, adding, "My guess is AI will probably be smarter than any human... next year."

Jurors appeared closely focused as he spoke.

Musk compared developing AI to raising a child, something you cannot fully control, he said, but can try to guide with values. He described himself as "extremely concerned" about AI and said he has been for a long time.

He also recounted a past disagreement with Google cofounder Larry Page, saying Page once called him a "speciest" for prioritizing human survival. Musk told jurors he found Page's stance "insane."

Musk said he also tried to warn former President Obama about the risks of AI, but at the time, "AI was not good enough to seem scary smart." He added, "Here we are in 2026, AI is very smart."

Later in his testimony, Musk described his early interactions with Altman, saying the two attended meetings and dinners during the early days of AI discussions. Altman was not in the courtroom during the entirety of Musk's testimony, though cofounder Greg Brockman remained.

The trial continues this week, with additional witnesses expected to testify as both sides lay out sharply different accounts of OpenAI's origins and mission.

In his opening statement, OpenAI lawyer William Savitt told jurors "we are here because Mr. Musk didn't get his way with OpenAI."

Savitt said Musk used his promises of funding to bully OpenAI founding members and tried to take control of OpenAI and merge it with Tesla. In fact, he said Musk wanted to form a for-profit company and own more than 50% of it.

There is no record, Savitt said, of promises made to Musk that OpenAI was going to remain a nonprofit forever. What Musk ultimately cared about, he said, was not OpenAI's nonprofit status but winning the AI race with Google.

Musk's attorney said the case is not about Musk, but rather Altman, Brockman and Microsoft.

By 2017, about two years after OpenAI's founding, it became clear that OpenAI would need more money, and Molo said the founders eventually settled on the idea of creating a for-profit arm of OpenAI that would support the nonprofit. Terms were capped for investors so they "couldn't make infinite profit."

"There is nothing wrong with a nonprofit having a for-profit subsidiary, but (it) has to advance the mission," Molo said.

Microsoft initially invested $2 billion in OpenAI. Then, in 2022, news spread that OpenAI had done a deal with Microsoft and it was a "game-changer," Molo said, which violated "every commitment" OpenAI made not just to Musk but to the world. It was no longer open source, it became a for-profit company for the benefit of the defendants and Microsoft was going to have control, through licensing, of much of its intellectual property, Molo said.

After opening statements, Musk's side began presenting a tale of alleged betrayal, deceit and ambition that caused OpenAI to pivot from its founding mission as an altruistic startup to a capitalistic venture now valued at $852 billion.