In brief
In a recent court verdict, Elon Musk lost his lawsuit against OpenAI, with the jury determining he did not file his claims within the required legal timeframe. Musk accused OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman of betraying the company's original non-profit mission after Musk’s significant early financial support. The case revealed deeper rifts between Musk and Altman, as well as insights from high-profile tech executives who testified during the trial. Musk's claims against Microsoft were also dismissed, prompting Musk to announce plans to appeal.
A California jury has tossed out Elon Musk's high-profile lawsuit against OpenAI and its boss Sam Altman. In a unanimous verdict, the jury agreed that Musk had waited too long to file his lawsuit, leaving all of his claims essentially expired.
Musk had accused Altman of breaching a non-profit contract by shifting the ChatGPT-maker to a for-profit company after Musk donated $38m (£28.5m) early in OpenAI's history.
Musk claimed Altman had deceived him by accepting his money and then reneging on OpenAI's original non-profit mission to develop artificial intelligence (AI) technology for the benefit of humanity.
Jurors spent just about two hours on Monday deliberating on the case, but they had spent three weeks viewing internal correspondence and hearing testimony from Musk, Altman and other tech industry executives, such as Microsoft's chief executive Satya Nadella.
Musk had accused Microsoft of aiding and abetting OpenAI in its allegedly improper transition to a more for-profit structure.
Musk's other claims against Microsoft were dismissed as a matter of law given the jury's findings on the two claims against OpenAI.
A spokesperson for Microsoft said of the verdict: The facts and the timeline in this case have long been clear. The company added that it remained committed to its work with OpenAI.
The jury's decision adds to a string of recent losses and settlements for Musk in court.
Within a few hours of the verdict, Musk criticized the decision against him in the OpenAI case, claiming on X that it created a free license to loot charities if you can keep the looting quiet for a few years! He accused the judge overseeing the case of being a terrible activist who used the jury as a fig leaf. Musk also vowed to file an appeal, asserting that the jury did not decide on the merits of the case and that the decision was based on a calendar technicality.
As the jury found that the statute of limitations had lapsed for Musk's claims of breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment, they were not required to consider the merits of his claims.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, remarked that the jurors had reached a very fact-based decision. On the first day of the trial, Musk stated in court, 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.
During the trial, Altman testified that Musk had once supported the idea of OpenAI becoming a for-profit business and sought control over its direction. The lawsuit can be seen as a reflection of the ongoing animosities between Musk and Altman, which have intensified since Musk's departure from OpenAI in 2018.
Sam Singer, a spokesman for OpenAI, called the verdict a tremendous victory and critiqued Musk's effort as a strategy to slow down competition. OpenAI’s lawyer stated that Musk’s lawsuit bore no relationship with reality, affirming that the jury rightly concluded Musk had lied about the company's origins.
Lawyers suggest that Musk's potential appeal would likely face significant challenges, as appeals of jury verdicts are notoriously difficult to win.
