Jurors in Oakland begin deliberating after closing arguments in Musk v. Altman, a federal case that could reshape AI governance and nonprofit-to-for-profit conversion law.
Closing arguments concluded May 14 in federal court in Oakland, California, sending to the jury a dispute that will determine whether OpenAI's conversion from a nonprofit to a for-profit entity violated enforceable charitable trust obligations and exposed its leadership to liability [1]. Elon Musk's legal team asked jurors to hold Sam Altman and OpenAI accountable for what it characterized as a breach of the foundational commitments under which Musk helped build the organization [1]. Musk was absent for the proceedings, reportedly accompanying President Trump on a trip to China, a fact his lead counsel, Steven Molo, acknowledged to the jury with an apology [1].
The case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and presided over by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, followed more than 10 days of testimony [2]. Altman took the stand and testified that he never promised Musk the company would remain a nonprofit and that Musk had sought approximately 90 percent equity control over OpenAI during its formation [2]. Musk's counsel countered by attacking Altman's credibility and introducing journal entries attributed to co-founder Greg Brockman that, Musk's team argued, pointed to deliberate deception in the company's governance evolution [2]. Altman denied the core allegations and defended the conversion as consistent with the company's mission to develop artificial general intelligence for broad human benefit [3].
The damages demand is $150 billion, a figure that reflects Musk's theory that he and other early donors were defrauded of the value they conferred on a charitable enterprise that OpenAI then redirected for private gain [2]. Beyond the damages figure, the case presents federal courts with a largely untested question: whether the charitable trust principles that constrain traditional nonprofits can be enforced by a private plaintiff against an AI company that restructured its corporate form while retaining a nominal nonprofit parent [3]. That question has drawn attention well beyond this litigation, as other AI ventures with hybrid nonprofit-for-profit structures watch the proceedings closely.
The jury now begins deliberations. A verdict for Musk could impose personal liability on Altman and constrain OpenAI's ongoing restructuring, which involves Microsoft as a major investor [2]. A verdict for the defendants would effectively ratify the conversion and limit the reach of charitable trust doctrine in the technology sector. Judge Gonzalez Rogers has not indicated a timeline for when she expects a verdict [1].