Elon Musk lost his lawsuit against OpenAI, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and Microsoft ( MSFT ) on Monday after a nine-person jury rejected his claims in less than two hours.
The decision followed a three-week trial in Oakland, California, in which Elon tried to prove that OpenAI violated the purpose for which it was formed. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers agreed with the advisory jury’s decision, finding that neither Sam nor OpenAI was liable. She also dismissed the breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment claims because they were raised too late.
Yvonne said that she was prepared to dismiss the case “right there and then”. Yvonne went on to add, “there is a lot of evidence to support the jury’s decision.” Steven Molo, Elon’s lead attorney, informed the judge that Elon still has the right to appeal. So, while the legal battle is not entirely over, Monday’s ruling was a defeat for Elon.
This ruling also ended the claim against Microsoft, which Elon said was responsible for infringement by OpenAI since Microsoft invested in OpenAI in 2019.
Jury clears Sam Altman and OpenAI after Elon fails to prove binding nonprofit
Elon filed suit against Sam and OpenAI in 2024. He claimed that OpenAI was created in 2015 as an AI lab with a charitable purpose; however, its founders subsequently switched to a business model. Elon co-founded the organization in 2015 and left the board of directors in 2018. He said in court that he invested about $38 million because he trusted that OpenAI would develop AI systems “for the benefit of humanity.” It was not intended to enrich one man.
Elon’s legal representatives claimed that Sam and Greg “stole a charity,” which is the main charge of the lawsuit. According to the plaintiff, OpenAI’s founders abandoned the initial goal and focused on their own enrichment. Elon demanded serious legal consequences for the shift.
The amounts were large. Elon’s lawyers requested that OpenAI and Microsoft forfeit up to $134 billion in “ill-gotten gains.” In addition, they asked the court to exclude Sam and Greg from the leadership and reverse the restructuring that took place in 2025, which contributed to the growth of the profitable part.
Elon insisted that the funds were not personal to him. He asked that all recovered amounts be returned to the “OpenAI charity”.
However, the problem was the lack of evidence. Elon’s lawsuit did not mention any founding document that permanently guaranteed the nonprofit status of OpenAI. Apparently there is no such document. As a result, his team was forced to build arguments based on emails, messages, discussions and records from OpenAI’s founding period.
This means that the entire trial depended on memories, written documents and credibility. The jury had to determine which version of events was more convincing in the process of forming OpenAI.
OpenAI says Elon wanted control while Microsoft and Google remained central to the case
OpenAI’s lawyers argued that Elon’s donations were not legally limited. Their point was that he gave money but did not attach clear written limits to it. They also said OpenAI needs to restructure because advanced AI costs serious money. The company needed cash, chips, engineers and cloud power to compete with Google DeepMind, which sits under Alphabet (GOOGL).
OpenAI’s team also used Elon’s own history against him. They showed that Elon had previously discussed a profitable setup but wanted control if it happened. They also said he once pushed for OpenAI to be folded into Tesla (TSLA).
Microsoft was drawn into the case because of its deep financial ties to OpenAI. Elon accused Microsoft of aiding the alleged breach of charitable trust. The court also dismissed this claim.
After the verdict, lawyers for OpenAI and Microsoft hugged and clapped back as they left the downtown Oakland courtroom. It was the courtroom vote on their side. Elon’s side kept the appeal option open.
Yvonne also dismissed two extra claims after finding they were barred by statute of limitations. She then thanked the jury and told them they could talk to “anyone about anything”. People in the gallery laughed. She warned them that any discussions should take place at a reasonable time and place, and only with their consent.
Don’t just read crypto news. Understand it. Subscribe to our newsletter. It’s free.
Disclaimer for Uncirculars, with a Touch of Personality:
While we love diving into the exciting world of crypto here at Uncirculars, remember that this post, and all our content, is purely for your information and exploration. Think of it as your crypto compass, pointing you in the right direction to do your own research and make informed decisions.
No legal, tax, investment, or financial advice should be inferred from these pixels. We’re not fortune tellers or stockbrokers, just passionate crypto enthusiasts sharing our knowledge.
And just like that rollercoaster ride in your favorite DeFi protocol, past performance isn’t a guarantee of future thrills. The value of crypto assets can be as unpredictable as a moon landing, so buckle up and do your due diligence before taking the plunge.
Ultimately, any crypto adventure you embark on is yours alone. We’re just happy to be your crypto companion, cheering you on from the sidelines (and maybe sharing some snacks along the way). So research, explore, and remember, with a little knowledge and a lot of curiosity, you can navigate the crypto cosmos like a pro!
UnCirculars – Cutting through the noise, delivering unbiased crypto news
