OAKLAND, Calif. — Elon Musk’s high-stakes trial against OpenAI entered its third day on April 30 with the billionaire entrepreneur repeatedly clashing with the company’s lead attorney and a federal judge moving to contain the proceedings to the core contractual dispute at hand.
The trial, unfolding in U.S. District Court before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, centers on Musk’s claim that OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman broke faith with the nonprofit’s founding promise to develop artificial intelligence for the public good, not for private profit. Musk, who provided much of the initial funding for the startup in 2015, has accused Altman of betraying commitments to keep the organization focused on humanity’s benefit.
Judge Rogers, however, made clear early Thursday that the courtroom would not become a forum for debating AI’s dangers. When Musk’s lawyers attempted to raise the subject, the judge pointed out that Musk’s own company, xAI, operates in the same space. “People don’t want to put the future of humanity into Mr. Musk’s hands,” 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. It could be one day in a federal court in this country that we may have that trial. That is not this trial, and we are not going to get sidetracked on that issue in this trial.”
On the stand, Musk faced aggressive cross-examination from OpenAI attorney William Savitt. Savitt probed Musk’s earlier testimony about investor profit caps, asking whether capping profits would have kept OpenAI faithful to its original nonprofit character. “It depends on how high the cap is,” Musk replied. When Savitt suggested his answer had changed, Musk shot back that “few answers are going to be complete, especially if you cut me off all the time.” He added that if the cap is “super high,” then OpenAI is “really a for-profit at that point.”
Savitt also questioned Musk about his other companies — Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and X — all of which are for-profit enterprises. Musk affirmed that he believes each one is “socially beneficial.” The attorney then asked why Musk had not started a nonprofit himself in the eight years since leaving OpenAI.
“I thought I had started a nonprofit with OpenAI but they stole it,” Musk replied, adding that this is “the entire basis of this lawsuit.”
OpenAI’s legal team has rejected the allegations and argued that no binding agreement ever required the company to remain a nonprofit indefinitely. They contend the lawsuit is designed to slow OpenAI’s rapid commercial ascent while strengthening xAI, the competing AI firm Musk launched in 2023.
The trial is scheduled to continue through late May. Judge Rogers excused Musk from the witness stand Thursday but noted he could be called back later.