Elon Musk has alleged in court that OpenAI’s current leadership diverted an organisation he says he originally conceived as a public-spirited charity. He described OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, as his idea and claimed that executives later “looted” it by shifting its structure and purpose.
In testimony during a high-profile trial concerning OpenAI’s future, Musk stated that he intended the organisation to function as a nonprofit counterweight to the concentrated power of large technology companies. According to his account, he proposed the concept, created the name, recruited early personnel and provided initial funding.
Musk argued that co-founder Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman departed from this initial nonprofit vision. He characterised OpenAI’s evolution into a powerful, profit-oriented entity as both a personal breach of trust and a systemic risk to public confidence in charitable institutions.
Musk asserted that normalising the redirection of a charity’s assets or mission toward private benefit would undermine the broader framework of charitable giving in the United States. He maintained that OpenAI was intended to operate as a charity that did not confer financial benefit on any individual.
OpenAI’s legal representatives presented a contrasting narrative. They stated that Musk had previously supported the creation of a for-profit structure to obtain the substantial capital needed for advanced AI research. They further argued that Musk’s lawsuit followed his inability to secure control over the organisation’s strategic direction.
One OpenAI attorney claimed that Musk’s primary concern was maintaining personal dominance in the AI sector, framing the dispute as a conflict over power and influence rather than over principles of nonprofit governance.
Musk’s legal team responded that the critical shift occurred when OpenAI began receiving large-scale external investment, particularly from Microsoft. They argued that this capital inflow altered leadership priorities toward commercial objectives and away from the original nonprofit charter and public-benefit mandate.
Musk is seeking approximately 150 billion dollars in damages and is asking the court to require that OpenAI be reoriented as a nonprofit organisation. He also seeks the removal of Altman and Brockman from leadership roles. Musk has stated that any financial award would be directed to OpenAI’s charitable arm rather than retained personally.
The case is being overseen by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. She has cautioned Musk about his social media commentary regarding Altman, leading both parties to agree to limit public statements while the trial is ongoing.
Beyond the immediate legal issues, the proceedings function as a test case for governance models in the AI sector. The outcome may influence whether leading AI systems are treated more as public infrastructure subject to nonprofit or public-interest constraints, or as commercial products driven primarily by private investment and profit incentives. The court’s decision could affect how future AI organisations structure their ownership, funding and accountability mechanisms.
