From a legal standpoint, the battle of the billionaires is now in the hands of the judge and jury.<\/p>\n
Regardless of how federal Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ultimately decides the case Musk filed against Altman, OpenAI and Microsoft, and what penalties she might impose, the Tesla CEO\u2019s attorneys used the trial to question Altman\u2019s trustworthiness and damage OpenAI, the experts said.<\/p>\n
Even if Musk loses the trial, \u201cI think he\u2019s still laughing … right now, because he really … buried the hatchet in Altman\u2019s public perception,\u201d said Vince Joralemon, a senior fellow at UC Berkeley\u2019s Center for Law and Technology.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/6a07c21999157.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Elon Musk, left, gestures as he walks through a hallway inside the U.S. District Court in Oakland on April 29.<\/p>\n
Godofredo A. V\u00e1squez\/Associated Press<\/p>\n
In the case, which took place in Oakland\u2019s U.S. District Court, Musk accused Altman and Greg Brockman \u2014 OpenAI\u2019s CEO and president, respectively \u2014 of breaking an agreement they made to keep the company as a nonprofit when he gave them money to launch it.<\/p>\n
Musk also charged Altman and Brockman of using the money he gave to enrich themselves when they created a for-profit subsidiary of OpenAI and began to raise massive amounts of money for it.<\/p>\n
For its part, OpenAI argued that Musk not only knew about the plan to create a for-profit arm of the artificial-intelligence startup, he took part in the discussions concerning it. Musk ultimately walked away from OpenAI, according to the company, only because Altman and Brockman wouldn\u2019t agree to put him in charge of the for-profit entity or sell OpenAI to Tesla.<\/p>\n
After more than two weeks of testimony, lawyers for the two sides began their closing arguments Thursday. The jury, which is playing an advisory role in the case, will begin deliberations next week. At the same time, Rogers will begin the remedy portion of the trial to determine what penalities to impose on Altman, Brockman, OpenAI and Microsoft should Musk prevail.<\/p>\n
Once it reaches a decision, the jury will make a recommendation to Rogers on who should prevail on Musk\u2019s claims. She will make the final decision on the verdict and, if necessary, the remedies.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s not at all clear how she or the jury will come down on the case, the legal experts said.<\/p>\n
Musk\u2019s side effectively portrayed OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as untrustworthy and told a compelling story about how Altman and Brockman betrayed him, the experts said. But Musk had numerous hurdles to overcome in his case, and it\u2019s not obvious that he cleared them, they said.<\/p>\n
There are \u201ca lot of major things that would need to all end up coming up in his favor to … get the kind of relief that he\u2019s been asking for,\u201d said Peter Molk, a law professor at the University of Florida.<\/p>\n
One big question coming into the trial was whether Musk even had standing in the case \u2014 essentially, the right to bring his lawsuit. In general, state attorneys general oversee nonprofits and are the ones who step in to seek remedies when there are alleged misdeeds related to them.<\/p>\n
OpenAI tried to get the case thrown out, arguing that Musk lacked standing. Rogers denied that motion, but there\u2019s a chance it could come up again.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s unlikely that after having completed the trial Rogers would just dismiss the case on standing grounds at this point, the legal experts said.<\/p>\n
\u201cI just would be really surprised if it came down to that,\u201d Joralemon said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cI feel like that has already been decided, and … if just feels really sloppy if that is the thing that comes down here,\u201d he said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
But the experts said the issue could still play a role in the remedy phase of the trial \u2014 at least indirectly. The attorneys general of California and Delaware \u2014 who clearly do have standing \u2014 signed off on OpenAI\u2019s corporate restructuring. Given that, it\u2019s unlikely that Rogers would undo that transformation if Musk wins the case, they said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019d be surprised if [the standing issue] wasn\u2019t operating in the background as she\u2019s thinking through, \u2018what kind of governance changes do I think should be needed here,\u2019\u201d Molk said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Another big hurdle for Musk is the statute of limitations \u2014 the legally imposed deadlines for filing certain types of lawsuits.<\/p>\n
Musk had two to three years from becoming aware of the alleged violations to file his case. When exactly that happened was a central issue in the trial, because the Tesla CEO didn\u2019t file his lawsuit until August 2024.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Report says ballot measure to raise Overpaid Executive Tax is risky when evidence shows businesses have cut their presences in The City<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Sunnydale Market will open next year, offering customers grocery items at prices below-average retail prices<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
A new PBS documentary exploring the health consequences of loneliness and social isolation features a program at Curry Senior Center in the Tenderloin<\/p>\n Musk argued that he didn\u2019t realize that Altman and Brockman were essentially turning OpenAI into a for-profit enterprise with Microsoft\u2019s help until January 2023, when Microsoft invested $10 billion in the AI company<\/a>. OpenAI, conversely, argued that Musk himself was pushing to turn the company into a for-profit as early as 2017.<\/p>\n The issue of what Musk knew when \u2014 and when the timer for filing his lawsuit began ticking down \u2014 is likely to be a matter of intense debate by the jury, Joralemon said. And it could be the matter that tips the case in OpenAI\u2019s favor, he said.<\/p>\n That \u201ccould be a really boring outcome to this,\u201d Joralemon said.<\/p>\n Musk needed also to show that he had in fact been wronged by Altman and Brockman. But that\u2019s another weak point of his case, the experts said.<\/p>\n His side didn\u2019t present any direct evidence that Altman and Brockman had agreed to keep OpenAI as a nonprofit, Molk said. There was no contract or written agreement that his attorneys could point to, he said.<\/p>\n The best evidence they were able to offer was indirect \u2014 most notably,\u00a0some diary entries from Brockman<\/a>. In one of those, Brockman suggested that if they were to convert OpenAI into a for-profit corporation after telling Musk they were committed to the nonprofit, it would be a \u201clie.\u201d Brockman also wrote that it would be \u201cmorally bankrupt\u201d to convert the company without Musk and would represent them stealing the nonprofit.<\/p>\n OpenAI president Greg Brockman, left, leaves the U.S. District Court in Oakland on April 29.<\/p>\n Godofredo A. V\u00e1squez\/Associated Press<\/p>\n That evidence was helpful for Musk, but not definitive, Molk said. And much of his case involved not showing that Altman and Brockman had wronged him but that they were untrustworthy and had made a lot of money running OpenAI, he said.<\/p>\n That might have been the best they could do, given what they had to work with, he said.<\/p>\n \u201cIf you don\u2019t really have direct promises from anyone at OpenAI saying, \u2018We promise to remain a nonprofit without any for-profit operating piece for X number of years\u2019 \u2014 if you don\u2019t have that then, you don\u2019t want to just do nothing with your time,\u201d Molk said.<\/p>\n Musk tried to argue that he was duped by Altman and Brockman into funding a nonprofit that they intended to convert into a for-profit enterprise. But it\u2019s hard to believe that, said Deven Desai, a professor of business law and ethics at the Georgia Institute of Technology business school. The evidence OpenAI presented that Musk was involved in discussions about turning the company into a for-profit and wanted to lead it undermines that position, he said.<\/p>\n If that evidence holds up \u201cin the jury\u2019s mind, I don\u2019t know that they\u2019ll believe that there\u2019s this grand scheme to rob him of this nonprofit,\u201d Desai said.<\/p>\n All that said, Musk\u2019s side did do an effective job of undermining the credibility of Altman and Brockman and sullying their characters, the experts said. Brockman\u2019s diary entries felt like \u201ca smoking gun,\u201d Joralemon said. If the case comes down to who they think is more believable, that could weigh in Musk\u2019s favor, they said.<\/p>\n OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, right, and company president Greg Brockman, center, arrive at the U.S. District Court in Oakland on April 30.<\/p>\n Godofredo A. V\u00e1squez\/Associated Press<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Musk\u2019s attorneys showed that he donated money and didn\u2019t get anything in return, while insiders, including Brockman in particular, made lots of money, Joraelmon said.<\/p>\n \u201cThat\u2019s just a clear narrative, and his side, I think, made that well,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Even if the case goes against Musk anyway, he gained by tarnishing Altman and OpenAI, the experts said.<\/p>\n That\u2019s certainly \u201cnot something that OpenAI wants to see for their CEO,\u201d Desai said.<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/6a06027085a79.image.png\")
<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/69fe1a0b3262e.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/68ccb7381e9fb.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/6a07c14ce318b.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/6a07c1a8c30c5.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n