On Monday morning, a nine-member jury unanimously rejected Elon Musk’s $150 billion lawsuit against the artificial intelligence start-up OpenAI.
After less than two hours of deliberation, the jurors decided that Mr. Musk had not sued in the time required by law. A judge then dismissed the tech mogul’s suit against OpenAI, which he helped found as a nonprofit in 2015.
After Mr. Musk left the A.I. research lab in 2018, his suit claimed, OpenAI’s chief executive, Sam Altman, and its president, Greg Brockman, abandoned the nonprofit’s mission by putting profits over the public good. The year Mr. Musk left, Mr. Altman attached a commercial company to the nonprofit and started raising billions of dollars from investors such as Microsoft. OpenAI is now valued at $730 billion and is expected to have an initial public offering, perhaps as soon as this year.
But the only thing the jury truly decided was that Mr. Musk waited too long to file his suit. His claims were left on the table.
Besides an important lesson on the perils of procrastination, here are five takeaways from the three-week trial.
Elon Musk is still determined to bring down OpenAI.
After the jury’s verdict, Mr. Musk’s lawyers said he intended to appeal.
Mr. Musk has long argued, both in court and out, that OpenAI endangered the future of humanity by abandoning its nonprofit mission. And his complaints about Mr. Altman and Mr. Brockman are deeply personal.
Two days before the start of the trial, Mr. Musk sent a text message to Mr. Brockman, asking if he was interested in settling the case. When Mr. Brockman suggested that both sides drop their claims, Mr. Musk responded with a text attacking Mr. Brockman and Mr. Altman.
“By the end of this week, you and Sam will be the most hated men in America,” he wrote, according to a document filed in the trial. “If you insist, so it will be.”
But Mr. Musk’s case faced a high legal bar.
When Mr. Musk filed his suit, many legal experts questioned its merits, and many doubted it would go to trial.
“I was surprised we got there,” Dorothy Lund, a Columbia University law professor who specializes in corporate law. She said the case would not have made it to trial in Delaware (where OpenAI was incorporated), which typically takes a stricter approach to corporate law.
On Monday, the jury’s decision also showed that Mr. Musk faces a big problem with the statute of limitations, which was three years for this case. He began publicly complaining about OpenAI’s behavior as early as 2020 but did not sue until 2024.
Mr. Musk wants to control the race to A.I.
Evidence presented in the trial showed that Mr. Musk had wanted to fold OpenAI into his electric car company, Tesla, in 2017 and 2018. He also poached an important researcher from OpenAI around that time and hoped to poach others.
That could undermine his appeal of the verdict. OpenAI’s lawyers have argued that Mr. Musk is complaining about OpenAI’s transforming itself into a for-profit even though he wanted to do the same thing back in 2017.
But his efforts to merge Tesla and OpenAI also show his enormous ambition in A.I. Though he has complained that OpenAI created a dangerous race to A.I., he very much wants to be a part of that race — and that has been true for a long time.
He recently folded xAI, his artificial intelligence start-up, into SpaceX, his rocket ship company. SpaceX is preparing its own initial public offering on Wall Street, which could value the company at $1.5 trillion.
Sam Altman has a credibility problem.
Two weeks before the trial started, The New Yorker published a 16,000-word article under the headline “Sam Altman May Control Our Future — Can He Be Trusted?” And once the trial was underway, Mr. Musk’s lawyers spent three weeks trying to undermine Mr. Altman’s credibility.
When Mr. Altman was on the stand, Steve Molo, Mr. Musk’s lead lawyer, repeatedly asked if he was trustworthy. “Are you a person who just tells people things they want to hear whether those things are true or not?” Mr. Molo asked Mr. Altman.
During his closing arguments, Mr. Molo attacked Mr. Altman with a sweeping metaphor.
“Imagine that you’re on a hike, and you come upon one of those wooden bridges that you see on a trail, and it’s over a gorge,” Mr. Molo told the jurors. “There’s a river that’s 100 feet below, and it looks a little scary, but a woman standing by the entry to the bridge says, ‘Don’t worry, the bridge is built on Sam Altman’s version of the truth.’ Would you walk across that bridge? I don’t think many people would.”
Mr. Musk’s suit did not get past the jury, but given the enormous media attention on the trial, he succeeded in raising questions about Mr. Altman character.
The A.I. race will continue apace.
If Mr. Musk’s suit had succeeded, he would have landed a serious blow to OpenAI.
He asked for $150 billion in damages and wanted Mr. Altman to be kicked off OpenAI’s board of directors. He also wanted OpenAI to unwind a move it had made to become a for-profit company before an initial public offering.
That could have shifted the course of the A.I. race. But now OpenAI is free to push ahead in that race as it challenges a host of other formidable competitors, including Anthropic, Google and Meta.
Cade Metz is a Times reporter who writes about artificial intelligence, driverless cars, robotics, virtual reality and other emerging areas of technology.
The post Five Takeaways From the Blockbuster Trial Pitting Elon Musk Against OpenAI appeared first on New York Times.
