A California jury has unanimously dismissed the high-profile lawsuit filed by Elon Musk against OpenAI and its Chief Executive, Sam Altman.
Following three weeks of testimony, the jury concluded that Musk waited too long to initiate the legal challenge, effectively allowing his claims to expire under the statute of limitations.
The legal dispute centred on Musk’s allegation that Altman breached a non-profit contract by transitioning the creator of ChatGPT into a for-profit entity.
Musk, who provided $38 million (£28.5 million) in early funding to the organisation, claimed that Altman deceived him by abandoning the original mission to develop artificial intelligence for the collective benefit of humanity, reports BBC.
The jury reached its verdict in around two hours on Monday after hearing from several prominent tech industry figures, including Microsoft Chief Executive Satya Nadella. Musk had previously accused Microsoft of assisting OpenAI in its allegedly improper commercial shift; however, the court dismissed these claims as a matter of law following the jury’s primary findings.
A spokesperson for Microsoft stated that “The facts and the timeline in this case have long been clear,” adding that the firm remains dedicated to its partnership with OpenAI.
Reacting to the decision on the social media platform X, Musk criticised the outcome, suggesting it creates “a free license to loot charities if you can keep the looting quiet for a few years!.”
He further described the presiding judge as a “terrible activist”. Although he later deleted that post, Musk asserted in another message that he would appeal, arguing the jury decided on a “calendar technicality” rather than the “merits of the case”.
Because the jury found that the timeframe for filing claims regarding unjust enrichment and breach of charitable trust had lapsed, they were not required to evaluate the substance of Musk’s accusations.
During the trial, Musk testified that the matter was “actually very simple,” stating, “It’s actually very simple… It’s not OK to steal a charity… If it’s okay to loot a charity, the entire foundation of charitable giving will be destroyed.”
In contrast, Sam Altman testified that Musk had previously supported the idea of OpenAI becoming a commercial venture and had sought long-term control of the organisation.
Altman recounted a “hair-raising moment” when Musk allegedly suggested that his control over the entity “should pass to my children”. Musk departed the company in 2018 after his co-founders refused to grant him such control.
Sam Singer, a spokesman for OpenAI, described the verdict as a “tremendous victory” outside the Oakland courthouse. He characterised the lawsuit as “nothing but an effort by Musk to slow down a competitor.”
William Savitt, the lawyer representing OpenAI, added that the lawsuit “bears no relationship with reality” and asserted that the jury found Musk’s testimony regarding the company’s origins to be untruthful.
While Musk’s lawyer, Marc Toberoff, insisted that “This war is not over,” legal experts suggest an appeal may face significant hurdles. Raffi Melkonian, an appellate lawyer, noted that “Appeals of jury verdicts are very hard to win.”
Sarah Federman, a professor at the University of San Diego, likened the battle between the billionaires to “Godzilla taking on King Kong,” noting that neither figure has emerged from the public trial unscathed.
