OAKLAND, United States — May 1, 2026 —
Elon Musk’s legal battle with OpenAI entered a more confrontational phase on Thursday as the billionaire entrepreneur sparred repeatedly with the company’s attorney during the third day of testimony in a closely watched federal trial.
The proceedings, held in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, revolve around Musk’s allegation that OpenAI abandoned its original nonprofit mission and transformed into a for‑profit enterprise in violation of what he says were foundational commitments made when he co‑founded the organization in 2015. Musk has argued that the shift diverted the company from its stated goal of developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity, while OpenAI maintains that no such binding promise existed and that Musk’s lawsuit is driven by competitive motives linked to his own AI venture, xAI.
Tensions rose during cross‑examination as OpenAI lawyer William Savitt pressed Musk on earlier statements regarding profit caps and the company’s governance structure. Savitt questioned whether Musk had provided complete answers the previous day, prompting Musk to accuse the attorney of interrupting him and posing questions designed to mislead the jury. “Few answers are going to be complete, especially if you cut me off all the time,” Musk said, adding that an excessively high profit cap would effectively make OpenAI “a for‑profit at that point.”
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers intervened at several points, urging both sides to keep the focus on the legal issues rather than broader debates about artificial intelligence or its potential risks. She also questioned Musk’s legal team about his decision to launch xAI, noting that he is now operating in the same sector as the organization he accuses of mission drift.
Savitt’s questioning extended to Musk’s other companies — including Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and X — all of which Musk acknowledged are for‑profit ventures. When asked why he had not founded a separate nonprofit after leaving OpenAI’s board in 2018, Musk replied, “I thought I had started a nonprofit with OpenAI, but they stole it,” reiterating that this belief underpins his lawsuit.
The courtroom exchanges reflect the deepening rift between Musk and OpenAI’s leadership, a conflict that dates back to disagreements over the organization’s direction and the establishment of a for‑profit subsidiary after Musk’s departure. Musk has testified that he contributed roughly $38 million to OpenAI and later felt “betrayed” when the company pursued commercial partnerships and significant outside investment. OpenAI disputes this characterization, arguing that Musk was aware of the structural changes and that his claims are aimed at undermining the company’s rapid growth.
The trial, expected to continue through late May, carries potential implications for the governance of AI research organizations and the boundaries between nonprofit missions and commercial development. As testimony resumes, the court will continue to weigh Musk’s allegations against OpenAI’s defense that its evolution was both transparent and necessary to advance its technology.