On Thursday in Oakland, California, Elon Musk used his third day of testimony to dispute questions from OpenAI’s side as the federal trial that pits him against the ChatGPT maker continued into its next phase. The case centers on OpenAI’s 2015 creation as a nonprofit primarily funded by Musk, and on Musk’s claim that the company’s later move toward a for-profit structure breaks promises tied to keeping OpenAI focused on humanity’s benefit.
The morning at the trial already included a fight over scope, with the judge warning that the proceeding should not become a debate over whether artificial intelligence poses risks to humanity. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers directed the parties not to discuss AI dangers to humanity during the trial, saying the issue could belong in a different future case and not in this one.
Rogers told Musk’s lawyers that “Your client, despite these risks, is creating a company that is in the exact same space,” referring to xAI, which launched in 2023. She added that “People, she said, ‘don’t want to put the future of humanity into Mr. Musk’s hands,’” and then instructed that the parties should not get “sidetracked” into AI-safety questions during the trial. She said, “This is not a trial on the safety risks of artificial intelligence. This is not a trial on whether or not AI has damaged humanity,” adding that “It could be one day in a federal court in this country that we may have that trial.”
As Musk testified, OpenAI’s attorney William Savitt pressed him on earlier testimony in which Musk said investor profits were capped. Savitt asked Musk about that prior testimony and whether his answers had been complete, and the exchange quickly turned into a dispute over how Musk responded under questioning and whether Savitt was framing the questions to mislead the jury.
Musk responded that “It depends on how high the cap is.” He said Savitt then suggested that “wasn’t your complete answer yesterday right?” and Musk replied that “few answers are going to be complete, especially if you cut me off all the time.” Musk then said that if the cap were “super high,” then OpenAI would be “really a for-profit at that point,” as the questioning continued.
Lawyers for OpenAI have rejected Musk’s allegations and say there were never promises that OpenAI would remain a nonprofit forever. The company has argued Musk’s civil lawsuit targets its growth and is aimed at strengthening xAI, which Musk launched in 2023 as a competitor.
During cross-examination, Savitt also questioned Musk about his other companies—Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink and X—and whether they were all for-profit. Musk replied that they were, and he affirmed that he believes they are “socially beneficial.” Savitt later asked why Musk had not started a nonprofit himself, eight years after he left OpenAI, and Musk responded by saying “I thought I had started a nonprofit with OpenAI but they stole it,” adding that “this is ‘the entire basis of this lawsuit.’”
Rogers excused Musk from the witness stand on Thursday, and the trial is scheduled to continue through late May, with the possibility that Musk could be called back later.