Author: Zen, PANews

The dispute and rift between Musk and Sam Altman over control of OpenAI, its commercialization direction, and its original mission have reached their extreme, ultimately ending up in court.

Musk accused OpenAI of deviating from its original intention of "opening up AI for all mankind." However, the OpenAI and Altman camps believe that Musk's repeated emphasis on betraying his original intention was more out of resentment at losing his dominant position in the early power struggle.

This conflict is, in a way, a microcosm of the upheavals of the entire AI era. But just over a decade ago, things were completely different.

In 2015, artificial intelligence had not yet become a global industrial phenomenon. The explosion of ChatGPT was still a long way off, and most of Silicon Valley's attention was focused on mobile internet, social platforms, and the sharing economy. However, within a few tech circles, a new shift was already emerging:

A year ago, Google acquired DeepMind. In 2014, this was just another typical large-scale tech acquisition to outsiders, but within Silicon Valley's core circles, it sent shockwaves far greater than anticipated. More and more people began to realize that the pace of artificial intelligence development might be approaching a tipping point.

If a general artificial intelligence that surpasses human capabilities truly emerges in the future—who will control it? This question is beginning to loom over the entire industry like a shadow.

Elon Musk and Sam Altman, who later became complete enemies, stood on the same side against this backdrop. At that time, they had a common enemy.

Allies of a common enemy

In the mid-2010s in Silicon Valley, AI was shifting from academic research to genuine industrial competition. Google owned DeepMind, Meta was aggressively recruiting AI researchers, and Amazon and Microsoft were also betting on machine learning infrastructure.

However, many believe the real danger lies not in AI itself, but in its monopoly by a few tech giants. Elon Musk is one of the most radical among them. He has long publicly warned of the risks of artificial intelligence, even calling it one of the greatest threats to human civilization. To some, his anxiety about AI borders on paranoia.

Meanwhile, Sam Altman was gradually moving from the world of startup incubators to broader technological issues. At that time, Altman did not have the intense public controversy he has today. As a typical Silicon Valley technology idealist, he believed that technology would reshape the world and that a few key infrastructures would determine the human order for the next few decades.

OpenAI was founded in 2015. Today, we see OpenAI as a leading AI company, but initially, it was more like an experiment combining technology and socio-political considerations. Its goal wasn't just to create AI, but to establish an AI research organization different from Google's. Its core narrative in its early days—non-profit, open research, and preventing superintelligence from being controlled by a single company—remarkably aligns with today's approach of integrating decentralized principles with scientific research and AI technology.

At that time, OpenAI carried a strong utopian feel. Research results were openly shared, papers were publicly released, and even the project name "Open" carried a deliberate manifesto. For a long time, Musk and Altman believed they were doing something that could change the future power structure of humanity. But soon, reality began to close in.

Differences in ideology and power

OpenAI's initial problems weren't just about technological research; it also faced funding constraints. Computing power, GPUs, researcher salaries, data centers—everything was becoming increasingly expensive. The cost of training its AI models began to spiral out of control rapidly.

OpenAI quickly realized that idealism alone was insufficient to compete in this war, especially given that its main rival, Google, already possessed a significant advantage in computing power. It was here that Musk and Altman began to have fundamental disagreements.

Both sides agree that AGI is extremely important. However, they have drastically different answers regarding OpenAI's philosophy of survival.

According to later leaked internal discussions, Musk was increasingly dissatisfied with OpenAI's development direction. He worried that OpenAI was lagging behind Google in technological capabilities and questioned the organization's efficiency. Media reports indicated that Musk proposed more radical integration plans, including the possibility of Tesla taking over OpenAI.

However, this direction did not receive support. For many within OpenAI, the idea was that once it entered a corporate structure, it might lose its original purpose. The conflict shifted from "technical approach" to "control."

Who decides the future of OpenAI, and who truly owns it? In this process, Sam Altman's influence is rapidly increasing. He is becoming the de facto core organizer of OpenAI. Compared to Musk's stronger personal will, Altman is better at building alliances and coordinating capital and organizational structure. This is a key reason why OpenAI has been able to continuously raise funds and expand.

However, this also meant that OpenAI was gradually deviating from its original idealistic laboratory form. By 2018, the rift had become irreparable. In the same year, Musk resigned from the OpenAI board of directors.

The official reason given was to avoid conflict with Tesla's AI business, but many people don't believe it's really that simple and prefer to interpret it as a failed power struggle.

Embracing Capital, OpenAI Forms Alliance with Microsoft

After Musk's departure, OpenAI truly entered the Altman era, marking the most crucial turning point in OpenAI's history. It began to fully embrace capital.

In 2019, OpenAI introduced a capped-profit structure. This is a very unique design. On the surface, OpenAI retains control as a non-profit organization, but at the same time, it allows external investors to receive limited returns.

This structure is essentially a compromise. OpenAI realized that without access to the capital system, it simply couldn't continue competing. What truly changed everything was the subsequent deep partnership with Microsoft. Microsoft not only provided massive funding but also cloud computing infrastructure. In the AI ​​wars, this was practically like providing oxygen.

Subsequently, OpenAI's model capabilities began to leap forward rapidly. From GPT-2 to GPT-3, and then to GPT-4, it began to become the most central player in the generative AI wave.

But at the same time, another problem is becoming increasingly apparent: OpenAI is becoming what it once tried to oppose. It is no longer open, its models are becoming increasingly closed, and commercial interests are becoming increasingly important. Moreover, its relationship with Microsoft is deepening.

Musk sees this as almost ironic. OpenAI was originally founded to prevent the centralization of AI power. Yet, just a few years later, it has formed a deep alliance with one of the world's largest tech companies. More importantly, he is no longer the one controlling everything.

Musk's anger toward OpenAI is a complex mix of emotions. There is disappointment at the ideological level, hostility after losing control, and a sense of betrayal to some extent.

Meanwhile, Sam Altman's power became increasingly consolidated. He not only became a key figure at OpenAI but also gradually became one of the most influential people in the entire AI industry. But with great power comes great conflict. The real war began.

The angry former founder

In late 2022, ChatGPT was released, igniting the entire tech industry. Within just a few months, generative AI became the hottest technology trend globally, and OpenAI truly took center stage for the first time.

By this time, Musk had completely shifted to the opposing side. He began frequently and publicly attacking OpenAI, criticizing it for "no longer being open" and for becoming a closed-source company controlled by Microsoft. In many interviews and social media posts, he increasingly resembled an angry former founder.

At the same time, he also began building his own AI force. In 2023, xAI was founded. This was seen by many as Musk's direct response to OpenAI. The conflict between the two sides also began to evolve from organizational differences into an ideological and corporate war.

Musk has repeatedly emphasized that AI should be more open. The OpenAI camp counters that Musk also supported commercialization in the past, only beginning to criticize it after losing influence. Both sides believe they are the ones truly staying true to their original vision.

The boardroom coup that erupted at the end of 2023, with Sam Altman's sudden removal from the board, completely exposed OpenAI's internal power structure to the public. The entire Silicon Valley was instantly shaken, but even more dramatic events followed. A large number of employees publicly supported Altman, investors exerted pressure, and Microsoft intervened. Just a few days later, Altman returned to OpenAI, with even more power than before.

This event made the outside world realize for the first time that OpenAI is no longer just a research institution; this top global AI company is also a massive power machine. Capital, technology, talent, board of directors, supermodels—everything is intertwined.

The conflict between Musk and Altman has finally become completely public.

Legal war breaks out

In 2024, Musk officially sued OpenAI and Sam Altman. He accused OpenAI of deviating from its founding promise of "openly developing AI for all humanity." In the lawsuit, Musk attempted to prove that OpenAI was originally a non-profit organization, but had been completely transformed by commercial interests.

OpenAI responded strongly. They released some early emails and internal communication records in an attempt to prove that Musk not only knew the direction of commercialization back then, but even supported a similar transformation.

The two sides began a real legal battle.

On April 28, 2026, the Elon Musk v. OpenAI case officially began in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California in Oakland. Musk's lawsuit, originally filed in 2024, contained 26 charges. Following preliminary rulings and Musk's own simplification efforts, only two charges remained for trial: breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment. The fraud-related charges were withdrawn shortly before the trial.

Musk is seeking up to $150 billion in damages, demanding the removal of Altman and Brockman from their positions and forcing OpenAI to revert to a non-profit organization. The entire settlement will go to OpenAI's charitable arm, with no personal gain sought.

During their opening statement, Musk's lawyers went so far as to assert, "The defendants in this case have stolen a charity." They cited OpenAI's 2015 founding bylaws, which state that the organization "is not for any personal gain," elevating the case to the very foundation of the charitable donation system. Musk warned from the witness stand, "If OpenAI wins, it will open the door to plundering every charity in America."

The OpenAI camp countered with a completely different narrative. Attorney Savitt stated in his opening statement, "We stand here today not because OpenAI betrayed its mission, but because Musk didn't get what he wanted from OpenAI." Court documents revealed that Musk had offered to acquire 55% of OpenAI's equity, but this was rejected by the co-founders: "They refused to hand over the keys to artificial intelligence to one person." OpenAI characterized the case as retaliation launched by a competitor of xAI after Musk's failed power struggle.

The most damaging evidence in the trial came from a 2017 private diary entry by OpenAI President Greg Brockman, in which he wrote, “This is our only chance to get rid of Elon.” An email from co-founder Ilya Sutskever to Musk stated, “You have shown us that absolute control is extremely important to you.” Musk saw this as the “last straw” that broke the camel’s back.

The first phase of the court's liability determination hearing is expected to continue until mid-May, with the jury making an advisory decision. The second phase of the hearing on remedies is scheduled to begin on May 18, with the judge making a separate decision on whether to remove Altman and Brockman from their positions, whether to rescind the for-profit transformation, and the amount of damages.

The lawsuit has attracted so much attention not only because it involves two of the most famous people in Silicon Valley.

More importantly, it exposes the most fundamental contradiction in the AI ​​industry. When the development cost of super artificial intelligence becomes so high that only a few companies can afford it, can "openness" still exist? If AGI ultimately emerges, to whom should it belong? Is capital destined to devour idealism?

These issues have actually permeated the entire history of OpenAI. In a sense, the break between Musk and Altman is more like a microcosm of the evolution of AI in Silicon Valley over the past decade.

Initially, they both believed they were preventing the monopoly of technological power. But ultimately, they went in different directions. One became OpenAI's fiercest enemy, while the other propelled OpenAI to the center of global AI power.

Today, as both sides accuse each other in court, it becomes clear that this war may have been unavoidable from the start. Because OpenAI was never just a technological project. It was more like an experiment about control over core technologies for the future world. And if the experiment succeeded, the war surrounding it was destined to begin.