Our Take
Brockman's testimony shifts the narrative from mission betrayal to a power struggle over AGI control, but his personal wealth and journal entries complicate his credibility.
Why it matters
The trial outcome could derail OpenAI's $1 trillion IPO and reshape how AI lab governance disputes play out in court. Both xAI and OpenAI have massive public offerings at stake.
Do this week
AI executives: Document all board discussions and equity negotiations now so you can defend governance decisions if partnerships sour.
Brockman says Musk demanded majority control in 2017
OpenAI president Greg Brockman testified that Elon Musk pushed for commercialization after OpenAI's Dota 2 victory in 2017, contradicting Musk's claims about protecting the nonprofit mission. According to Brockman, Musk wanted majority equity and CEO control of a new for-profit entity to build artificial general intelligence.
The confrontation came to a head in August 2017 when cofounders proposed equal equity shares. Musk "stormed around the table" and walked out with a Tesla painting, Brockman told the jury. "The one thing we could not accept was to hand him unilateral, absolute control, potentially, over the AGI," Brockman said.
Shivon Zilis, former OpenAI board member and mother of four of Musk's children, revealed that Musk tried recruiting Sam Altman to lead a competing AI lab at Tesla. Internal documents show Tesla planned to "rival the likes of Google/DeepMind" with this lab, which never materialized.
$134 billion in damages hangs over OpenAI's IPO plans
Musk is seeking up to $134 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft, targeting the 2024 restructuring that converted OpenAI's for-profit arm into a public benefit corporation. The case threatens OpenAI's path to a $1 trillion IPO while Musk's own xAI, now part of SpaceX, targets a $1.75 trillion public offering as early as June.
Musk's lawyer Steven Molo attacked Brockman's credibility by highlighting his $30 billion stake despite never investing money in OpenAI. Electronic journal entries from 2017 showed Brockman writing about wanting to become a billionaire and calling a nonprofit conversion "morally bankrupt" without Musk's consent.
The trial also exposed ongoing conflicts of interest, with Brockman holding stakes in multiple OpenAI business partners including Cerebras and CoreWeave.
Governance disputes now carry existential stakes
The case establishes a template for how founder disputes over AI lab control play out in court. Both sides are deploying personal communications, financial motivations, and mission statements as evidence of true intent.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever will testify next week before closing arguments. The jury's advisory verdict will guide the judge's final decision on whether to remove Altman and Brockman from their roles and unwind OpenAI's corporate structure.
The outcome signals whether courts will enforce early AI lab governance agreements or allow mission evolution as companies scale. For current AI executives, the precedent could determine how much protection incorporation documents provide against founder challenges.