Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, testified in court on Tuesday that Elon Musk desired "complete control" over the ChatGPT developer and even suggested that, upon his death, the AI startup should be passed to his children.
In this high-profile legal dispute with Musk, Altman recounted to the jury a "creepy moment" from nearly a decade ago when Musk, who was then involved in managing OpenAI, demanded "absolute control."
During his testimony, Altman described a discussion among OpenAI's co-founders regarding Musk's request for controlling equity. Someone asked Musk: "If you have control, what happens after you die?"
According to Altman, Musk responded: "I haven't thought it through carefully, but, you know, maybe it should be this way—control should be passed to my children."
Altman told the nine-member jury that he was "uncomfortable" with that plan.
The CEO's description of Musk's thoughts on inheritance came as the Musk v. Altman case entered its third week in federal court in Oakland, California.
Musk has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, aiming to prove that their partnership betrayed the AI company's original nonprofit mission. During Tuesday's hearing, Altman, one of the defendants in the case, criticized Musk for his eagerness to pursue profit and power.
Altman informed the jury that Musk was "convinced that if we were to establish a for-profit company, he must have complete control from the very beginning."
"He believed that only he could make those forward-looking, critical decisions," Altman stated. He added that he learned from Musk himself and his former chief of staff that the Tesla CEO was determined to devote the remainder of his career only to companies over which he could exercise complete control.
Altman expressed his opposition to having a single individual control OpenAI.
"Part of the reason we founded OpenAI was our belief that artificial general intelligence should not be controlled by any one person, no matter how well-intentioned they might be," he said.
He revealed to the jury that Musk had claimed he would "relinquish control later," but Altman did not believe it.
"With extensive experience in the startup world, I've witnessed many control disputes and learned a lesson—especially when a company is doing well, founders or those in power typically do not give up control; they can hold onto that power indefinitely," Altman testified.
Altman cited Musk's SpaceX as a prime example of such "founder-controlled tech companies."
When asked about Musk's desire to merge OpenAI into Tesla, Altman dismissed the idea. "Tesla is an automotive company; it does not share OpenAI's mission and vision," he stated.
This civil lawsuit revolves around OpenAI, which the two co-founded in 2015, and Altman's testimony marks a critical juncture in the case.
Musk, who testified last month as the first witness, accused Altman and other OpenAI executives of stealing the "nonprofit public benefit corporation" they co-founded.
"In essence, they are attempting to steal a public benefit corporation, and we are doing everything we can to stop them," Musk told the jury.
On Tuesday, when Musk's lawyer directly questioned Altman, "Did you steal this public benefit corporation?" Altman immediately refuted: "I find that claim very difficult to comprehend."
Musk left the company in 2018, claiming that he invested tens of millions of dollars in OpenAI to support its founding mission as a nonprofit dedicated to developing AI for the public good. However, he alleged that this mission was partially abandoned due to the company's partnership with Microsoft, which is also a defendant in his lawsuit.
Now in its third week, the trial's outcome could reshape the landscape of the AI field. If Musk prevails, OpenAI and its backer Microsoft could face substantial financial penalties.
Altman's testimony follows previous statements from numerous tech giants, including OpenAI President and Co-founder Greg Brockman and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, who have already testified before the Oakland jury.
Prior to jury selection in the case, OpenAI issued a statement on X, asserting that Musk's lawsuit "has always been a baseless, jealousy-driven effort to undermine a competitor."
Comments