Sam Altman testified that Elon Musk demanded 90% of OpenAI and abandoned the nonprofit in 2018, directly countering Musk's "stolen charity" lawsuit in Oakland federal court.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman took the stand in Oakland federal court on May 12, offering direct rebuttal to Elon Musk's core allegation that Altman orchestrated the theft of a charity by converting OpenAI from a nonprofit to a for-profit entity [1]. Altman testified that Musk had demanded 90% equity in the organization, a figure Altman characterized as incompatible with the nonprofit's founding mission [3]. Altman further testified that Musk attempted to recruit OpenAI staff away from the organization and that, following Musk's departure from the board in 2018, the nonprofit was effectively abandoned, left without the resources or leadership commitment it needed to pursue its stated goals [2].
The testimony came during the third week of trial before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the Northern District of California [1]. Musk filed suit alleging that Altman and co-founder Greg Brockman breached fiduciary duties owed to OpenAI's charitable mission when they pursued a structural conversion that brought in substantial commercial investment, most notably from Microsoft [2]. The liability phase of the proceeding is expected to conclude by May 21 [1]. Altman's appearance on the stand followed earlier witness testimony and set up what observers expect to be a contested cross-examination over the circumstances surrounding both Musk's exit and the decision to restructure the organization.
The case carries significant weight beyond the dispute between two prominent technology figures. At its center is a question courts have rarely confronted at this scale: whether promises embedded in a nonprofit's founding charter can bind subsequent leadership when commercial realities change, and what fiduciary obligations attach when a charitable entity pivots toward profit-generating activity [2]. If Musk prevails on the liability question, the ruling could establish a precedent that constrains how AI companies structure transitions away from nonprofit governance, potentially affecting similar organizations navigating the same tension between mission and capital [3].
The liability phase is scheduled to wrap by May 21, after which the court would turn to remedies if liability is found [1]. Altman is expected to face continued cross-examination before the phase closes. Judge Gonzalez Rogers, who has previously presided over high-profile technology disputes, has not yet indicated how she intends to weigh the competing accounts of OpenAI's founding commitments and Musk's role in shaping, then departing from, those commitments [2].