In the second week of the landmark Musk v. OpenAI trial, a fundamental contradiction emerged at the center of the lawsuit. Elon Musk claims he was deceived into donating $38 million for a nonprofit mission dedicated to safe AI development. But according to testimony from OpenAI president Greg Brockman, the plaintiff was the one who pushed hardest to create the very for-profit structure he now seeks to dismantle.
The testimony represents a direct assault on Musk's stated motivations. Last week, Musk took the stand alleging that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Brockman had betrayed a founding promise, accepting billions from Microsoft and restructuring toward profit. He asked the court to remove both men from their roles and unwind OpenAI's conversion to a public benefit corporation. He is seeking as much as $134 billion in damages.
This week, Brockman painted a starkly different picture. He testified that Musk advocated for creating a for-profit arm and fought for what Brockman described as "absolute control" over it. OpenAI has argued that Musk is now attempting to undermine a potential competitor to his own AI company, xAI, which is valued alongside SpaceX at a combined $1.75 trillion and expected to go public as early as June.
The stakes extend far beyond courtroom theatrics. OpenAI is racing toward an IPO at a valuation approaching $1 trillion. The trial's outcome could derail that listing entirely or force a restructuring that reshapes the competitive landscape of AI development. Meanwhile, Shivon Zilis—former OpenAI board member and mother of four of Musk's children—added another layer to the contradiction. She revealed that Musk attempted to recruit Altman to lead a new AI laboratory at Tesla, the electric-vehicle company Musk controls.
Brockman described the moment negotiations collapsed in a text exchange two days before trial began. When Brockman suggested both sides drop their claims, Musk replied: "By the end of this week, you and Sam will be the most hated men in America. If you insist, so it will be."
Outside the courthouse, protesters rallying against the AI race sang hymns over the voices of lawyers giving press conferences. Altman listened in silence while Brockman, serene and even chipper in a blue suit, grew visibly agitated under cross-examination by Musk's attorney Steven Molo.
The trial has exposed the tension between Musk's public narrative—that he founded OpenAI to ensure AI benefits humanity—and the internal power struggles that predated his 2018 departure. What remains unresolved is whether the court will view his lawsuit as an attempt to enforce a founding agreement or as an effort to damage a rival using the machinery of litigation. The answer will shape not just two companies but the entire trajectory of the AI industry.