Elon Musk told jurors Microsoft’s $10 billion investment 'broke' OpenAI’s safety‑first, nonprofit mission by shifting staff and technology into its for‑profit arm. He said he helped found OpenAI to prevent a 'Terminator outcome' and that the 2023 deal marked a turning point away from the openness and safety the organisation was meant to prioritise.

Musk on the stand Elon Musk opened his testimony as the first witness, framing his lawsuit as about more than corporate control. He told a nine‑juror panel advising US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers that siding with Sam Altman and his allies "will give license to looting every charity in America" and shake the "entire foundation of charitable giving." On the stand Musk repeated warnings he’s voiced for years about powerful AI: "It could also kill all of us ... The Terminator outcome," drawing a contrast between the future he wants — "like Star Trek" — and the one he fears. The remarks echo his public calls for tougher AI safety rules and government oversight. How the founders described OpenAI’s purpose Musk said he lobbied governments for AI regulation and met with then‑President Barack Obama in 2015 because "the government was not stepping up," according to his lawyer Steven Molo. Musk said meeting with Sam Altman — then a 30‑year‑old investor — led to creating OpenAI as a nonprofit meant to counter unchecked corporate AI development. He described the organisation as envisioned to be an "open‑source nonprofit" with a limited for‑profit arm to raise capital, but only so "the tail didn’t wag the dog." Musk’s attorney compared the setup to a museum that runs a for‑profit shop whose proceeds support the museum’s mission. Key points Musk emphasised - Origin: OpenAI was founded in part as a response to rapid, commercial AI advances at firms like Google; Musk cited a confrontation with Google cofounder Larry Page. - Limits on commercialisation: Musk accepted a small for‑profit arm for fundraising, but argued the balance shifted as OpenAI grew. - Microsoft investment as turning point: He pointed to Microsoft’s $10 billion deal in 2023 as the moment the nonprofit’s purpose was undercut, alleging staff and intellectual property were moved into the for‑profit company. The Microsoft turning point Musk said the scale and secrecy of the Microsoft investment undercut OpenAI’s commitment to openness and safety. He used a metaphor — likening the shift to a museum selling off its most important artworks so they were "locked up where no one could see them" — to argue the nonprofit’s mission was compromised. OpenAI today operates a nonprofit parent and a capped‑profit subsidiary that can take outside capital; Musk’s testimony emphasised the tension between those legal structures and how resources and rights to technology were actually used. Trial stakes: governance, money and an IPO The lawsuit seeks remedies that could include changes to OpenAI’s governance or financial damages. Musk’s lawyers say the move into a large for‑profit arm undermined the nonprofit’s safety‑first purpose; a court order could affect how the organisation governs model access, raises funds and controls intellectual property. The outcome may influence future funding, corporate structure and any potential IPO plans.

Related Articles

The lawsuit seeks remedies including changes to OpenAI’s governance and financial damages that could affect how the lab raises money and controls its work. 'It could also kill all of us ... The Terminator outcome,' Musk said on the stand.

This article was created with AI assistance.