- Musk amended his lawsuit against OpenAI to redirect any damages he might win to OpenAI’s charitable nonprofit arm rather than to himself — explicitly stating he “is not seeking a single dollar for himself”
- The amendment also seeks Sam Altman’s removal from the OpenAI nonprofit’s board and demands Altman and President Greg Brockman turn over any equity or financial benefits they received from the for-profit conversion
- The suit — which also names Microsoft as a defendant — seeks more than $150 billion in damages, arguing OpenAI defrauded Musk as a donor by abandoning its nonprofit mission and converting to a for-profit structure
- The trial is set to begin later this month in Oakland, Calif.; OpenAI responded by calling the suit “a harassment campaign driven by ego, jealousy and a desire to slow down a competitor” and separately wrote to AGs in Delaware and California asking them to investigate Musk for “anti-competitive” behavior
What Happened?
Elon Musk has amended his ongoing lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, asking that any damages he wins be awarded to OpenAI’s charitable nonprofit arm rather than to himself personally. The filing, made ahead of a trial set to begin later this month in Oakland, Calif., also requests that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman be removed from the nonprofit’s board and that both Altman and President Greg Brockman surrender any equity or financial benefits they received as a result of OpenAI’s for-profit conversion. Musk and Altman co-founded OpenAI in 2015 as a nonprofit dedicated to AI safety. After Musk departed in 2019, Altman steered the organization into a for-profit structure that has since been used to raise billions from Microsoft and other investors at a current valuation of $852 billion.
Why It Matters?
The amendment is a strategic reframing: by redirecting potential damages to the nonprofit, Musk’s legal team is attempting to neutralize OpenAI’s core counternarrative — that the lawsuit is a self-interested competitive attack by a rival AI entrepreneur. Musk’s lawyer Marc Toberoff framed it as setting the record straight on the suit’s original purpose: restoring a public charity that was allegedly hijacked for private gain. OpenAI fired back immediately, calling the case a harassment campaign and escalating with letters to the attorneys general of Delaware and California, accusing Musk of spreading “false and wholly unfounded allegations” and asking officials to investigate him for anti-competitive behavior. As OpenAI prepares for a potential IPO later this year at an $852 billion valuation, the outcome of this trial carries enormous stakes for both sides.
What’s Next?
The trial is expected to begin in Oakland later this month, with both sides now engaged in an aggressive pre-trial public relations battle alongside the legal proceedings. OpenAI’s request that state AGs investigate Musk adds a regulatory dimension that could complicate his broader business interests. Separately, OpenAI’s ongoing conversion to a public-benefit corporation — which restructured the nonprofit’s stake in the for-profit entity — remains a central factual dispute in the lawsuit. How the jury weighs Musk’s claim that he was defrauded as a donor, versus OpenAI’s argument that the conversion was a legitimate evolution of its mission, will shape not just this case but the broader legal framework governing nonprofit-to-for-profit conversions in Silicon Valley.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
