Elon Musk loses lawsuit against OpenAI, says he will appeal verdict

Elon Musk lost his lawsuit against OpenAI on Monday after a California jury ruled that he had waited too long to sue the company and its executives over its transition from a non-profit artificial intelligence research organisation to a commercial AI company.

The trial, which began on April 27 in Oakland, California, centred on Musk’s claims that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman had broken an agreement to maintain OpenAI as a non-profit entity focused on benefiting humanity. The jury, however, unanimously found that Musk’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations. According to Reuters, jurors deliberated for less than two hours before delivering the verdict.

Musk had sought nearly $150 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft, one of OpenAI’s largest investors, with the money proposed to be paid to OpenAI’s non-profit entity. He had also sought the removal of Altman and Brockman from their leadership roles.

The lawsuit, filed in 2024, accused OpenAI of abandoning its founding principles after establishing a for-profit structure and deepening its commercial partnership with Microsoft. Musk, who co-founded OpenAI in 2015 before leaving in 2018, argued that the company had shifted away from its original mission.

Following the ruling, Musk said in a post on X that the verdict was based on a procedural issue rather than the substance of the allegations. “Regarding the OpenAI case, the judge & jury never actually ruled on the merits of the case, just on a calendar technicality,” Musk wrote.

“There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is WHEN they did it!” he added. Musk also said he would appeal before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. “I will be filing an appeal with the Ninth Circuit, because creating a precedent to loot charities is incredibly destructive to charitable giving in America,” he wrote. “OpenAI was founded to benefit all of humanity.”

Arguments presented during the trial

According to multiple reports, the courtroom battle featured sharp exchanges between lawyers representing Musk and OpenAI over Altman’s credibility, Musk’s role in OpenAI’s early years, and the company’s transition to a for-profit structure.

In his closing arguments, Musk’s lawyer Steven Molo told jurors that five witnesses, including Musk, former OpenAI board members, and former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, had testified that Altman was dishonest, calling him a "liar". Molo also referred to Altman’s cross-examination, during which Altman did not directly answer “yes” when asked whether he was completely trustworthy and whether he had misled people in business dealings.

“Sam Altman’s credibility is directly at issue in this case,” Molo told jurors, according to reports.

Lawyers representing OpenAI rejected Musk’s claims and argued that Musk’s contributions were not solely responsible for the company’s success. William Savitt, a lawyer for OpenAI, argued in court that Musk had sought greater control over the organisation and had been informed as early as 2017 that OpenAI would require financing linked to a for-profit structure.

“Mr. Musk may have the Midas touch in some areas, but not in AI,” Savitt said during the trial. “To succeed in AI, as it turns out, all Mr. Musk can do is come to court.” Savitt also accused Musk of having “selective amnesia” regarding discussions around OpenAI’s restructuring and funding plans.

OpenAI has maintained that Musk was aware for years about the company’s plans to raise external capital and restructure parts of the organisation. Reuters reported that Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers later said Musk could face difficulty overturning the verdict on appeal because the statute-of-limitations issue had been decided as a factual matter by the jury.