Musk subsequently stated that he would appeal the judgment to the Ninth Circuit Court.

By: Yang Chen

Source: Wall Street Journal

Musk's legal offensive against OpenAI and Altman has encountered a major setback. The jury ruled on Monday that Musk's core allegations against OpenAI were not accepted due to the delayed timing of his lawsuit, resulting in Musk's defeat in this highly publicized technology feud in Silicon Valley.

After approximately two hours of deliberation, the federal jury unanimously found that Musk had known about the relevant circumstances for years but did not file the lawsuit until 2024, exceeding the reasonable statute of limitations. Therefore, the jury did not need to make a ruling on the substantive core issue—whether OpenAI had deviated from its founding mission of developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity to pursue commercial profits instead.

OpenAI attorney William Savitt stated to the media after the trial that the jury's ruling proved that this lawsuit was nothing more than "a hypocrite's intentional sabotage against a competitor." Microsoft also welcomed the ruling, stating that "the facts and timeline related to the case have always been very clear."

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers remarked during the unanimous ruling: "I believe there is a substantial amount of evidence supporting the jury's decision." Musk stated that he would appeal the U.S. jury's ruling against OpenAI to the Ninth Circuit Court, but did not disclose the specific grounds for the appeal.

The Jury Avoided Core Controversy, Ending the Case on Timeliness Issues

The jury's refusal to consider the logical core of Musk's allegations is based on procedure rather than substance: since Musk was aware of the relevant circumstances years ago, he should have taken legal action earlier; filing the lawsuit in 2024 is not tenable in terms of timeliness.

This ruling means that Musk's core allegation that OpenAI "turned a charitable organization into a profit-making tool" has not undergone substantial review by the jury.

Musk's legal team had accused Altman and OpenAI co-founder Greg Brockman of "stealing a charitable organization" and characterized Microsoft's investment of over $13 billion in OpenAI (from 2019 to 2023) as part of a conspiracy.

OpenAI, on the other hand, insists that the transition to a business model is necessary to raise the enormous funds required to develop artificial general intelligence (AGI), which is essential for fulfilling its mission to benefit humanity, and pointed out that the OpenAI Foundation still retains governance rights over the public benefit corporation established last year.

The Trial Revealed High-Value Equity, Leading to Controversies Over Wealth Distribution

During nearly three weeks of proceedings, multiple prominent figures from the tech industry testified in court, and hundreds of private message records, diaries, and internal company documents were exposed, providing the public with a rare perspective on the internal workings of this nearly trillion-dollar company.

Greg Brockman confirmed in his testimony that his shareholding is valued at nearly $30 billion; former chief scientist Ilya Sutskever confirmed his equity is worth about $7 billion; and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testified that Microsoft's target return on investment is $92 billion, while as of last October, the valuation of Microsoft's equity had reached $135 billion.

Although Altman himself does not directly hold OpenAI equity, he revealed that he holds interests in companies that have business dealings with OpenAI, including an approximate $1.7 billion stake in the fusion company Helion Energy, about $633 million in the payment processor Stripe, and about $25 million in the chip company Cerebras Systems.

Musk's side emphasized these immense fortunes, highlighting that OpenAI's success has accumulated astonishing wealth for its founders and early investors, thereby demonstrating that profit motives have overshadowed the mission of public welfare.

The Narratives of Both Sides are Starkly Opposite, Musk is Accused of Being Driven by Jealousy

During the trial, the descriptions of OpenAI's entrepreneurial journey by both plaintiffs and defendants were completely contradictory, revealing the deep-seated animosity between Musk and Altman to the public.

Musk's lawyers portrayed Altman as a deceitful business leader and repeatedly mentioned Altman's brief removal from the CEO position by the OpenAI board in 2023 to argue that "even OpenAI's own board does not trust him."

OpenAI, in contrast, characterized Musk as a jealous competitor. The lawyers pointed out that Musk angrily left after the co-founders refused to entrust him with full control of the company, and in 2023, he founded xAI, directly competing with OpenAI.

Both Altman and Brockman criticized Musk's leadership style, claiming it is "black or white" and emotionally volatile. Brockman bluntly stated: "He understands rockets; he understands electric cars, but he does not understand—I believe still does not understand—artificial intelligence."

The Legal Battle Continues, Multiple Lawsuits Still Progressing

This defeat does not mean the end of Musk's legal maneuvering against OpenAI.

In the subsequent stages of the same case, Musk has also accused OpenAI of creating a monopoly in its cooperation with Microsoft, claiming that OpenAI lobbied its investors to refuse to fund its competitors (including his own xAI).

In response, Judge Gonzalez Rogers candidly expressed after a discussion with the lawyers that "it is unclear whether these claims are really tenable," citing "the presence of significant competition in this industry."

At the same time, Musk's xAI has filed a separate independent lawsuit against OpenAI involving trade secret theft and antitrust issues, which has yet to enter substantive proceedings.