【AI前沿】The Real Losers of the Musk v. Altman Trial

Maxwell ZeffParesh DaveBusinessMay 14, 2026 8:49 PMThe Real Losers of theMusk v. AltmanTrialA federal jury is now deciding whether Elon Musk will win his lawsuit against OpenAI and Sam Altman—but the trial has made everyone look bad.Photo-Illustration: WIRED Staff; Getty ImagesCommentLoaderSave StorySave this storyCommentLoaderSave StorySave this storyAttorneys delivered closingarguments in theMusk v. Altmantrial on Thursday in a final attempt to convince a judge and jury that their respective clients, Elon Musk and Sam Altman, are the most well-intentioned, truth-telling stewards of OpenAI’s founding nonprofit mission. A judgement could be delivered as soon as next week, ending a decade-long battle between two of the technology industry’s most influential entrepreneurs.But regardless of the outcome, there is a wide set of losers in this case. Based on ample amounts of evidence, it appears that the people worst off are the employees, policymakers, and members of the public who believed in the mission of a nonprofit research lab—and supported OpenAI because of it. What seemed to take precedent for Musk and OpenAI’s other cofounders at almost every turn was building the world’sleadingAI lab—even if that meant creating a multibillion-dollar for-profit company in the process.“It’s hard to see how the public interest is being protected by either of these parties, and that is really what is ultimately at stake in a case about a nonprofit,” says Jill Horwitz, a Northwestern University law professor with expertise in nonprofits and innovation, who listened to the closing arguments. “The public interest in the nonprofit is at risk no matter who wins.”OpenAI’s stated mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence (AGI) benefits humanity, but humanity is not a party in this case. In practice, OpenAI has spent the last decade attempting to rival multitrillion-dollar companies like Google and build AGI first. Additionally, Musk and Altman have fought tooth and nail to be the ones who control OpenAI.“Musk and Altman are basically locked in a race to be the first to build superintelligence, and they both rightly fear what the other will do if they win. The rest of us should fear them both,” says Daniel Kokotajlo, a former OpenAI researcher who joined in 2022 and hasraised concerns over the company’s safety culture. He was part of a group of former OpenAI researchers that filed anamicus briefin this case against OpenAI’s for-profit conversion, arguing that the nonprofit structure was critical in their decision to join the company.Got a Tip?Are you a current or former OpenAI or Tesla employee who wants to talk about what’s happening? We’d like to hear from you. Using a nonwork phone or computer, contact the reporters securely on Signal at Mzeff.88 and Peard33.24.At trial, OpenAI’s nonprofit was discussed as if it were yet another corporate investor. OpenAI’s lawyers argued that giving the nonprofit a $200 billion stake in the for-profit company is proof that OpenAI is fulfilling its mission. Public advocacy groups disagree that funding alone is sufficient.“I am among the many people who are glad to see how many philanthropic resources the OpenAI foundation has at its disposal to do good work,” says Nathan Calvin, VP of state affairs for the AI safety nonprofit Encode, which filed anamicus briefopposing OpenAI’s restructuring earlier in this case. “But it’s worth remembering that the nonprofit also has a governance role, and that the mission of the nonprofit is not that of a typical foundation, it is specifically to ensure that AGI benefits all of humanity. Money is important for that goal, and is useful all else equal, but it is not the goal in and of itself.”Origin StoryEvidence revealed in this case suggests Altman and Musk were in agreement about OpenAI launching as a nonprofit and operating much like a typical startup. They shared the goal of beating Google DeepMind in the race to AGI. But creating OpenAI as a nonprofit turned out to be a horribly inconvenient means to winning that race.Musk has accusedAltman, OpenAI’s CEO, and Greg Brockman, its cofounder and president, of straying from the nonprofit’s founding mission. He claims the founders used his $38 million investment to turn OpenAI into an $850 billion company and makeseveralof its cofoundersbillionaires.To win this case, Musk has to convince a jury and judge that he attached certain conditions to his investment, specifically that OpenAI could only use the money for a charitable purpose, and that he filed the case in a timely manner. In response, OpenAI has argued that Musk has failed to prove either of these accusations, and that he simply has sour grapes about losing control of the AI lab.In one of the firstemailsAltman sent to Musk about setting up “some sort of nonprofit” that ultimately became OpenAI, in May 2015, he wrote that the people working on it would get “startup-like compensation.” Musk said it was “worth a conversation.”Virtually nothin