Musk v. Altman: in closing arguments, Musk's attorney doubled down on claims of Altman's untrustworthiness, while OpenAI's lawyer said Musk has no evidence

Lawyers for Elon Musk and OpenAI made their final arguments Thursday in the landmark trial whose outcome could shape the future of artificial intelligence.

Associated Press 2026-05-15

Context & Ripple Effects

Related coverage shows the case was narrowed before closing arguments: the judge directed Musk’s side away from broader claims about AI’s existential risk and toward facts surrounding OpenAI’s founding. Unsealed materials had also surfaced internal disagreement over whether open-source AI was becoming a secondary priority.

The subsequent jury verdict rejecting Musk’s claims as time-barred underscores that the dispute turned as much on legal timing and the evidentiary record as on competing visions for OpenAI.

First-order effects

The parties’ final presentations put the immediate dispute in stark terms: Musk’s case rested heavily on Altman’s credibility, while OpenAI argued that the record did not substantiate Musk’s allegations.
With the trial’s scope focused on founding-era facts rather than general AI-safety arguments, the near-term consequence was a verdict driven by legal proof and procedural defenses, not a court ruling on how AI labs should be governed.

Second-order effects

A defense centered on insufficient evidence and timeliness gives OpenAI and Altman a clearer basis to characterize the dispute as resolved on litigation grounds, while limiting Musk’s ability to turn this case into a broader courtroom challenge to OpenAI’s strategy.
The related testimony about xAI and OpenAI technology adds competitive friction between Musk’s AI venture and OpenAI, even though it was not the core issue identified in the closing-arguments coverage.

Third-order effects

If disputes over AI-lab missions increasingly reach court, founding documents, governance records, and limitation periods may matter more than broad public claims about safety or openness.
The case illustrates a structural tension in AI: organizations founded around mission-oriented commitments can face legal and reputational pressure when commercial strategy, governance, and competitor relationships evolve.

The trend: This is one data point in the growing legal and governance scrutiny of whether AI companies’ commercial evolution remains consistent with the commitments made at their founding.

Discussion

@mikeisaac Rat King on x
Musk counsel painting the “dont trust sam” picture in a bit more detail for the jury [image]
@michelletomkim Michelle Kim on x
@techreview OpenAI's lawyer Sarah Eddy delivers her closing argument. “No restrictions were placed on Mr. Musk's donations [to OpenAI],” she says. She notes that there were no documents, including tax forms and letters from Musk's donor advised funds, conditioned his donations on…
@eggerdc Andrew Egger on x
Imagining a juror who finds this compelling not because you can't trust Sam Altman but because you can't trust women
@mtslive @mtslive on x
LIVE TRIAL UPDATE: Musk's attorney in closing arguments: “Imagine a wooden bridge over a gorge, 100 feet below. A woman 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.”
@mikeisaac Rat King on x
short summary of the closings: Musk Camp: “all of these OpenAI executives are rich as hell and lying all the time” OpenAI Camp: “all of that is a sideshow and literally all the claims musk is bringing cannot be stood up by actual law” MSFT Camp: ::disappears into bushes::
@zeffmax Max Zeff on x
Musk's lawyer brought a big monitor (maybe 36 inches) into the courtroom. OpenAI's lawyers asked to use it. Musk's lawyers said no. The judge told Musk's lawyers they have to let OpenAi use it. Then OpenAI said it might not be possible to connect their laptops to it.
@zeffmax Max Zeff on x
YGR is scolding Elon Musk's lawyer, saying they should have talked to OpenAI about sharing their monitor. “What do I always tell you when you come in here. Talk to the other side.”
@hadas_gold Hadas Gold on x
Spicy exchange right now between Judge and Musk lawyer - i think about Musk's attorney saying at one point saying “we are not asking for money” Judge to Musk's lawyer “You are asking for money in this lawsuit. Otherwise, I will not be having an evidentiary hearing on Monday for
@haydenfield Hayden Field on x
this metaphor in Musk v. Altman closing statements is SENDING me [image]
@michelletomkim Michelle Kim on x
@techreview Molo offers a pithy metaphor for the jury about how to judge this case: if you're tying to cross a bridge, and someone tells you, “Don't worry, the bridge is built on Sam Altman's version of the truth. Would you walk across that bridge?” Molo says this case rests on A…
@zeffmax Max Zeff on x
A dongle has entered the courtroom. There's about 15 lawyers standing in the middle of the room rn talking about how to use this big monitor
@quinnypig Corey Quinn on x
I can't wait for the upcoming @MikeIsaac book, “Black Like Me: The New Adventures of Pot and Kettle”
@mikeisaac Rat King on x
ouch. OpenAI counsel begins closing arguments with a broadside against Musk: “Even the people who work for him, even the mother of his children, cant back his story.”
@mikeisaac Rat King on x
lots of Musk side closing arguments = semi-populist tack of pointing at OpenAI and saying these billionaires are making gobs of cash while running a charity for the supposed good of the world!" am curious if jury can register this argument even as it comes from *Elon Musk*
@michelletomkim Michelle Kim on x
@techreview OpenAI's lawyer Sarah Eddy argues that Elon Musk is lying when he says OpenAI should've remained a nonprofit. “It's all made up,” she says. She says during the company's early days in 2017, Musk wanted to create a for-profit and have “unilateral control” over it.
@mikeisaac Rat King on x
and we're back to “everyone hates google” again Molo using Larry Page, who they claim doesnt care about humanity, as a foil to the noble musk whose only care w/r/t AI is the future of humanity
@michelletomkim Michelle Kim on x
@techreview Molo tells the jury to use their common sense to judge the credibility of Altman. He says that Ilya Sutskever, Mira Murati, Helon Toner, Tasha Mccauley, and Elon Musk have all testified under oath that Altman is a liar. He's referring to Altman's alleged history of ly…
@seanokane Sean O'Kane on bluesky
i said on this week's @techcrunch.com Equity pod (out later today!) that the Musk/OpenAI trial didn't really accomplish much other than make all these people look bad, no surprise @lopatto.bsky.social wrote a far more interesting version of that take: — www.theverge.com/ai-arti…
@shiraovide Shira Ovide on bluesky
“From one petty bitch to another: beautifully done.” — I'm going to miss this trial and all the ridiculousness that it unearthed, and @lopatto.bsky.social's commitment to petty gossip. www.theverge.com/ai-artificia...
Vox Sara Herschander on x
The 5 most unhinged revelations from Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI

Chronicles