Musk v. Altman
Two of the founders of OpenAI are now in federal court fighting over what the company was supposed to be — and what it's allowed to become.
A decade after Elon Musk and Sam Altman helped found OpenAI as a nonprofit research lab, the two men are facing each other across a federal courtroom in Oakland. Musk alleges that Altman and OpenAI president Greg Brockman betrayed the lab's founding charitable mission by spinning its core technology into a for-profit business. OpenAI says Musk's lawsuit is a baseless attempt to hobble a competitor he failed to control.
Opening arguments began on April 28, 2026, with Musk's lead trial lawyer Steven Molo telling the nine-juror advisory panel that "without Elon Musk, there would be no OpenAI, pure and simple," according to CNBC's courtroom reporting. Of the 26 claims Musk originally asserted in 2024, only two remain at trial: breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment. The fraud and constructive fraud claims were dismissed by Musk's own lawyers ahead of trial to streamline the case. Microsoft, OpenAI's largest commercial backer, is named separately on an aiding-and-abetting claim.
Because the case is being heard in equity, Judge Gonzalez Rogers — not the jury — will issue the binding ruling. The trial is scheduled to run roughly four weeks, with all evidence expected by May 21.
The case at a glance
- Plaintiff
- Elon Musk
- Defendants
- OpenAI, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman
- Filed
- 2024 (originally state court, refiled federal)
- Court
- U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Oakland)
- Judge
- Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers
- Damages sought
- Up to $134 billion in alleged "wrongful gains," directed to OpenAI's nonprofit rather than Musk personally
- Other relief
- Removal of Altman and Brockman; unwinding of OpenAI's for-profit conversion
- Verdict
- Advisory jury; binding decision by judge expected mid-May 2026
How we got here
Musk, Altman, Brockman and others co-found OpenAI as a nonprofit dedicated to developing artificial intelligence "to benefit humanity." Musk becomes the largest individual donor, contributing roughly $44 million by court filings (other reports cite about $38 million).
After internal disputes over leadership and direction, Musk leaves OpenAI's board. The company cites potential conflicts with Tesla's own AI work.
OpenAI creates a for-profit subsidiary that operates under the nonprofit parent. The structure is intended to attract investment for the compute and chips required to build cutting-edge AI.
ChatGPT launches and goes viral. OpenAI's valuation climbs into the hundreds of billions, and Microsoft becomes a major commercial partner.
Musk founds xAI as a competitor to OpenAI.
Musk sues OpenAI, Altman and Brockman, alleging they reneged on commitments to keep the lab nonprofit. The case is later refiled in federal court in Oakland.
OpenAI restructures, cementing its form as a public benefit corporation under the nonprofit parent. Musk asks the court to unwind the conversion.
Jury selection. Nine jurors are seated to serve in an advisory capacity. Altman and Brockman appear in person; Musk does not attend but posts attacks on X.
Opening arguments begin in Oakland with Musk now present in court. His lead trial lawyer Steven Molo opens with: "Without Elon Musk, there would be no OpenAI, pure and simple."
The two sides
Musk's claims
Musk alleges he was "manipulated" and "deceived" into bankrolling OpenAI on the explicit understanding that any artificial general intelligence developed there would be open and shared with the world.
His complaint covers breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, false advertising, and unfair business practices.
He has asked the court to remove Altman and Brockman from their roles, unwind the for-profit conversion, and direct any damages to OpenAI's nonprofit arm rather than to him personally.
OpenAI's defense
OpenAI calls the lawsuit "baseless" and characterizes it as "a jealous bid to derail a competitor" — pointing to Musk's launch of xAI in 2023.
The company argues Musk knew early on that significant outside investment would be necessary, and was part of internal discussions about creating a for-profit arm.
OpenAI notes that its nonprofit still exists and retains the upside from the for-profit subsidiary; nonprofits are permitted to earn profits, only not distribute them to shareholders.
The legal question underneath
Beyond the personal feud, the case turns on a genuinely unsettled question of nonprofit law: when a donor gives money to a charity, what rights does that donor retain over how the charity later evolves? Musk's theory frames the case as a breach of charitable trust. Some legal scholars are skeptical that the framing maps cleanly onto how nonprofit law actually works, noting that OpenAI's nonprofit parent still exists and still controls the for-profit subsidiary.
California's attorney general — who would normally be the party with clearest standing to enforce a charitable trust — has declined to join Musk's suit, saying the office did not see how the action serves the public interest.
Who's expected to testify
- Elon Musk — Plaintiff. His testimony about what he was promised in 2015 is central to the case.
- Sam Altman — Defendant; OpenAI CEO.
- Greg Brockman — Defendant; OpenAI president.
- Satya Nadella — Microsoft CEO; relevant to OpenAI's commercial partnerships.
- Ilya Sutskever — Former OpenAI chief scientist and co-founder.
- Mira Murati — Former OpenAI CTO.
What a ruling could change
If Musk prevails, the most far-reaching remedies on the table would force OpenAI to unwind its for-profit structure and remove its current leadership. Even short of that, an adverse ruling — or a prolonged appeal — would cloud OpenAI's path to a public offering. Reporting suggests an IPO previously rumored for 2027 could slip to 2028 or later if the case extends through appellate review.
If OpenAI prevails, the company is positioned to continue its current trajectory: a roughly $500 billion–to–$1 trillion-valued enterprise, with a public benefit corporation operating under a nonprofit parent, and a path toward a stock listing.
Live coverage
Several major outlets are running live blogs that update through the trial day. The trial itself is closed to cameras; reporters file from inside the courtroom or an adjacent media room with an audio feed.
- CNBC — Live updates from inside the courtroom — Day-by-day reporting, including direct quotations from opening arguments.
- ABC7 San Francisco — Week 1 live blog — Local Bay Area coverage with running updates.
- MIT Technology Review — Ongoing trial coverage — Reporter Michelle Kim is filing through the trial.
- NBC News — What's at stake in the trial — Background on the case and witness list.
- NPR — Tech CEOs head to court over the fate of OpenAI — Audio reporting and explainer.
- CBC News — Trial overview — Includes pre-trial rulings on what Musk can and can't be questioned about.
- Axios — How OpenAI's Microsoft ties change as the trial begins — Focused on the Microsoft angle.
Primary documents and the IRS framework
For the actual court filings — the complaints, key orders, and the live federal docket — see The Docket. For the regulatory architecture beneath the case — the actual § 501(c)(3) statute, the Treasury regulations, the inurement prohibition, and where to find OpenAI's own Form 990 filings — see The Framework. Both pages link only to primary sources or major-outlet reporting.
Sources
This page is compiled from contemporaneous reporting by major outlets. Specific figures, dates, and quotations above are drawn from:
- CNBC — "Judge in Musk v. Altman seats nine-person jury" (April 27, 2026) and live trial coverage.
- NPR — "Musk vs. Altman: Tech CEOs head to court over the fate of OpenAI" (April 27, 2026).
- MIT Technology Review — "Elon Musk and Sam Altman are going to court over OpenAI's future" (April 27, 2026).
- ABC7 San Francisco — Live updates blog (April 27–28, 2026).
- NBC News — "What's at stake in the Elon Musk-Sam Altman trial" (April 27, 2026).
- CBC News — Trial overview (April 27, 2026).
This site is independent and not affiliated with OpenAI, xAI, Tesla, SpaceX, or any party to the litigation.