A federal jury in Oakland unanimously dismissed Elon Musk's $150 billion lawsuit against OpenAI on Monday, May 18, after less than two hours of deliberation. The verdict wasn't about whether Sam Altman and Greg Brockman actually betrayed OpenAI's nonprofit mission, but was about the timing.
Musk sued in 2024 but had been publicly complaining about OpenAI's for-profit shift since 2020, well beyond California's three-year statute of limitations. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers immediately adopted the jury's recommendation and tossed the case.
Musk shared the post on X on May 18 that he'll appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court, calling the dismissal "a calendar technicality" that never addressed the core allegations. "There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity," Musk wrote. "The only question is WHEN they did it."
But three weeks of testimony revealed more than just a legal dispute about nonprofit governance. It exposed the deeper power struggle over who controls the AI race and whether the billionaires steering humanity's technological future can be trusted. Here's what actually matters coming out of this trial.
Damilare Odedina
1. Musk's Appeal Faces a Nearly Impossible Legal Climb
Legal experts who spoke to the New York Times were blunt: this case was always weak, and the appeal is even weaker. Columbia Law professor Dorothy Lund, who specializes in corporate law, said she was "surprised we got there," meaning she was surprised the case even made it to trial.
She noted that in Delaware, where OpenAI was incorporated and which typically takes a stricter approach to corporate law, the lawsuit would have been dismissed much earlier.
The statute of limitations problem that sank Musk's case doesn't go away on appeal. He began publicly attacking OpenAI's transformation as early as 2020, posted about it repeatedly on X, all before finally suing in 2024 and even attempted to buy the company for $97.4 billion in February 2025.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals now has to decide whether there's any legal pathway around the timing issue. If the circuit court declines to take the case or rules against Musk, the door on his nonprofit-breach argument closes permanently in U.S. courts.
2. Musk Wanted What He Accused Altman of Doing: Controlling OpenAI for Profit
The most damaging evidence against Musk's own case came from his own behavior. Trial testimony revealed that in 2017 and 2018, Musk tried to fold OpenAI into Tesla, his electric car company. He also poached at least one important researcher from OpenAI during that period and hoped to recruit more.
OpenAI's lawyers pointed to this as proof that Musk's lawsuit is hypocritical: he's attacking OpenAI for transforming into a for-profit even though he wanted to do the same thing, on his terms, with him in control. The only difference is that Musk's bid to take control failed, so he left OpenAI's board in February 2018.
His recent folding of xAI into SpaceX, which is preparing for a $1.5 trillion IPO, shows he very much wants to be part of the commercial AI race. The trial made clear this was never about protecting a nonprofit mission. It was about who gets to profit from AI.
3. Multiple Witnesses Questioned Sam Altman's Trustworthiness Under Oath
Two weeks before the trial, The New Yorker published a 16,000-word investigation headlined "Sam Altman May Control Our Future: Can He Be Trusted?" The trial gave Musk's lawyers three weeks to reinforce that question in front of the world's media.
During cross-examination, Musk's attorney Steven Molo repeatedly asked Altman if he was trustworthy. "Are you a person who just tells people things they want to hear, whether those things are true or not?" Molo asked.
In his closing argument, Molo deployed a striking metaphor: "Imagine you're on a hike over a gorge. A woman by 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."
Several witnesses, including two former OpenAI board members, Helen Toner and Tasha McCauley, testified there were concerns about Altman's truthfulness. The jury never ruled on Altman's honesty, but OpenAI is on track for what could be one of the largest IPOs in history, with these credibility questions now part of the public record.
4. OpenAI Won the Battle But Confirmed Musk's Core Accusation
OpenAI's victory was total in legal terms. The jury rejected all claims in under two hours. But the trial confirmed the central fact Musk has been screaming about for years: OpenAI, founded as a nonprofit to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, is now an $852 billion commercial juggernaut racing toward an IPO that could create billions in personal wealth for its leaders.
Greg Brockman's $30 billion equity stake was revealed under oath. When Musk's lawyer Steven Molo asked if that figure was accurate, Brockman replied, "I think that may be true, yes." Molo emphasized during his closing statement that "Greg Brockman never invested a nickel."
OpenAI confirmed it's pursuing a public offering, potentially this year. Microsoft's multibillion-dollar investment cemented the for-profit transformation. All of this happened exactly as Musk described. The jury just decided he complained too late to do anything about it legally.
5. The AI Race Continues With Zero Oversight From Anyone Who Isn't a Billionaire
Perhaps the most important takeaway from the trial has nothing to do with who won. As Columbia Law professor Dorothy Lund told reporters, "This is a funny microcosm of this moment where we have this hugely important technology that's being developed by for-profit corporations run by people like Musk and Altman and not as part of some government-led initiative."
The trial exposed emails, text messages, and internal communications showing that the tiny group of people steering AI development can't even get along with each other. Six tech billionaires testified, with a combined wealth exceeding $850 billion: Elon Musk ($814 billion), Greg Brockman ($30 billion), Ilya Sutskever ($7 billion), Sam Altman ($3.4 billion), Bret Taylor ($2.5 billion), and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella ($1.3 billion).
With Musk's lawsuit dismissed, OpenAI is free to proceed with its IPO and continue the race against Anthropic, Google, and Meta. Musk's SpaceX, which absorbed xAI, is preparing its own $1.5 trillion public offering. The trial changed nothing about who controls AI or how it's being developed.
6. This Fight Is Far From Over: Musk Will Keep Coming
Musk's announcement that he'll appeal wasn't surprising. What was revealing is how he framed it: "I will be filing an appeal with the Ninth Circuit, because creating a precedent to loot charities is incredibly destructive to charitable giving in America."
That framing shows Musk understands he probably can't win on the legal merits, so he's positioning the appeal as a moral crusade to protect nonprofit governance.
Two days before the trial began, Musk texted Brockman threatening that "by the end of this week, you and Sam will be the most hated men in America." The jury's verdict didn't stop that campaign. It just forced Musk to continue it outside the courtroom.
As the Musk-Altman 2026 trial comes to an end, the only certainty is that the personal vendetta driving it isn't finished. OpenAI won the case, but Musk still has the world's largest social media platform and an apparently limitless willingness to use it.
Damilare Odedina
