Author: Zen, PANews
The dispute and breakdown between Musk and Sam Altman over control of OpenAI, its commercial direction, and its original founding mission have reached their peak, ultimately landing them on opposite sides of the courtroom.
Musk accuses OpenAI of deviating from its original mission of making AI open for all humanity, while from OpenAI and Altman’s perspective, Musk’s repeated claims of betrayal are largely driven by his resentment over losing dominance in the early power struggles.
This conflict is, in some ways, a microcosm of the broader fragmentation of the AI era. But over a decade ago, everything was completely different from today.
In 2015, artificial intelligence had not yet become a global industry craze. The explosion of ChatGPT was still far in the future, and most of Silicon Valley’s attention remained focused on mobile internet, social platforms, and the sharing economy. However, within certain tech circles, a new shift had already begun to emerge:
A year ago, Google invested in acquiring DeepMind. In 2014, this appeared to outsiders as just another typical large-scale tech acquisition, but within Silicon Valley’s inner circles, its impact was far greater than imagined. An increasing number of people began to realize that the pace of artificial intelligence development might be nearing a critical threshold.
If superhuman general artificial intelligence truly emerges in the future—who will control it? This question has begun to cast a shadow over the entire industry.
Elon Musk and Sam Altman, who later became completely estranged, found themselves on the same side under these circumstances—they shared a common enemy.
Allies of a common enemy
In the mid-2010s, Silicon Valley saw AI transitioning from academic research to genuine industrial competition. Google owned DeepMind, Meta was aggressively recruiting AI researchers, and Amazon and Microsoft began investing heavily in machine learning infrastructure.
But to many, the real danger is not AI itself, but its monopolization by a few tech giants. Musk is one of the most vocal advocates of this view. He has long publicly warned of the risks of AI, even calling it one of the greatest existential threats to human civilization. To some, his anxiety about AI borders on paranoia.
Meanwhile, on the other side, Sam Altman was gradually moving from the world of startup incubators toward larger technological issues. At that time, Altman had not yet acquired the intense public controversy he carries today; as a quintessential Silicon Valley technological idealist, he believed technology would reshape the world and that a few critical infrastructures would determine humanity’s order for decades to come.
In 2015, OpenAI was founded. Today, we view OpenAI as a leading AI company, but initially, it was more like an experiment integrating technology with social and political ideals. Its goal was not merely to develop AI, but to create an AI research organization distinct from Google—nonprofit, open in its research, and committed to preventing superintelligence from being controlled by a single corporation. OpenAI’s early core narrative closely aligns with today’s approach of integrating decentralization principles into scientific research and AI technology.
At that time, OpenAI carried a strong utopian spirit. Research findings were openly shared, papers were publicly released, and even the project’s name, “Open,” seemed like a deliberate declaration. For a long time, Musk and Altman believed they were doing something that could reshape the power structures of humanity’s future. But soon, reality began to close in.
Differences in philosophy and power
OpenAI's initial challenges were not only about technological research but also about financial pressure. Compute power, GPUs, researcher salaries, and data centers were all becoming increasingly expensive, causing the costs of training AI models to spiral out of control.
OpenAI soon realized that idealism alone could not compete in this race, especially since its top competitor, Google, already possessed a massive computational advantage. It was here that Musk and Altman began to diverge fundamentally.
Both parties consider AGI extremely important. However, they have radically different answers regarding OpenAI’s philosophy of survival.
According to later-revealed internal discussions, Musk had become increasingly dissatisfied with OpenAI’s direction. He was concerned that OpenAI was falling behind Google in technical capabilities and questioned its organizational efficiency. Some media reports indicated that Musk had proposed more aggressive integration options, including the possibility of Tesla taking over OpenAI.
However, this direction did not gain support, as many within OpenAI believed that once it entered the corporate system, it might lose its original purpose. The conflict began shifting from a "technical path" to one of "control."
Who decides OpenAI’s future, and who truly owns it? In this process, Sam Altman’s influence has rapidly grown. He has become the de facto central organizer of OpenAI. Unlike Musk’s more individualistic approach, Altman excels at building alliances, coordinating capital, and structuring organizations—key reasons why OpenAI has been able to continuously raise funds and expand.
At the same time, this also meant that OpenAI was gradually moving away from its original form as an idealistic laboratory. By 2018, the rift had become irreparable. That same year, Musk stepped down from OpenAI’s board.
The official reason is to avoid conflicts with Tesla's AI business, but many do not believe the matter is that simple, and instead interpret it as a failure in a power struggle.
Embracing Capital: OpenAI Partners with Microsoft
After Musk's departure, OpenAI truly entered the Altman era, marking the most critical turning point in its history. It began fully embracing capital.
In 2019, OpenAI introduced a capped-profit structure. This is an exceptionally unique design. On the surface, OpenAI retains control by its nonprofit organization, while simultaneously allowing external investors to receive limited returns.
This structure is, at its core, a compromise. OpenAI has recognized that without entering the capital system, it could not possibly continue to compete. What truly changed everything was its deep partnership with Microsoft. Microsoft is not only a major financial backer but also provides the cloud infrastructure. In the AI race, this is almost equivalent to providing oxygen.
Subsequently, OpenAI's model capabilities began to advance rapidly. From GPT-2 to GPT-3, and later GPT-4, it became the central player in the generative AI wave.
At the same time, another issue is becoming increasingly clear: OpenAI is becoming what it once sought to oppose. It is no longer open; its models are growing more closed, and commercial interests are becoming more significant. Moreover, its relationship with Microsoft is deepening.
In Musk’s view, this is almost ironic. OpenAI was originally founded to prevent the centralization of AI power. Yet, years later, it has formed a deep alliance with one of the world’s largest tech companies. More importantly, the person in control of it all is no longer him.
Elon Musk's anger toward OpenAI is mixed with complex emotions: disappointment on a philosophical level, hostility stemming from losing control, and a sense of betrayal.
On the other side, Sam Altman’s power has become increasingly solid. He has not only become a central figure at OpenAI but has also emerged as one of the most influential individuals in the entire AI industry. Yet, the greater the power, the greater the conflicts—and the real war has now begun.
Angry former founder
At the end of 2022, ChatGPT was released, igniting the entire tech industry. Within just a few months, generative AI became the most sought-after technological direction worldwide, and OpenAI stood at the center of the global stage for the first time.
At this point, Musk had fully taken the opposing side. He began publicly attacking OpenAI frequently, criticizing it for “no longer being open” and accusing it of becoming a closed-source company under Microsoft’s control. In numerous interviews and social media posts, he increasingly resembled an angry former founder.
At the same time, he also began building his own AI empire. In 2023, xAI was founded, widely seen as Musk’s direct response to OpenAI. The conflict between the two sides began evolving from organizational differences into an ideological and corporate war.
Musk continually emphasizes that AI should be more open. The OpenAI camp counters that Musk previously supported commercialization and only began criticizing it after losing influence. Both sides believe they are the true stewards of the original vision.
The boardroom coup that erupted at the end of 2023, during which Sam Altman was abruptly removed by the board, fully exposed OpenAI’s internal power structure to the public. The entire Silicon Valley was instantly shaken, but even more dramatic events followed: numerous employees publicly supported Altman, investors applied pressure, and Microsoft stepped in. Just days later, Altman returned to OpenAI—with even greater power than before.
This event made the outside world truly realize for the first time that OpenAI is no longer just a research institution—this world-leading AI company is also a massive machine of power, with capital, technology, talent, the board of directors, and supermodels all intertwined.
The conflict between Musk and Altman has now become fully public.
Legal war erupts
In 2024, Musk formally sued OpenAI and Sam Altman, accusing OpenAI of deviating from its founding commitment to “develop AI for the benefit of all humanity.” In the lawsuit, Musk sought to demonstrate that OpenAI was originally a nonprofit organization, but has now been fundamentally transformed by commercial interests.
OpenAI strongly countered, publicly releasing some of its early emails and internal communications in an attempt to demonstrate that Musk was not only aware of the commercial direction at the time but had also previously supported a similar transition.
Both parties have entered a true legal battle.
On April 28, 2026, the case of Musk v. OpenAI officially went to trial at the U.S. District Court in Oakland, California. Musk’s 2024 lawsuit originally included 26 claims, but after preliminary rulings and Musk’s voluntary reduction, only two claims remained for trial: breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment. Fraud-related claims were withdrawn shortly before the trial began.
Musk has filed a claim for up to $150 billion, demanding the removal of Altman and Brockman and the forced reinstatement of OpenAI as a nonprofit. The entire compensation amount would be directed to OpenAI’s charitable arm, with no personal gain sought.
In his opening statement, Musk’s attorney directly characterized the case: “The defendant in this case stole a charity.” They cited OpenAI’s 2015 founding charter, which states it was organized “not for the private gain of any individual,” elevating the case to the very foundation of charitable donation systems. Musk, while testifying, warned: “If OpenAI wins, it will open the door to looting every charity in America.”
The OpenAI camp countered with a completely different narrative. During opening statements, lawyer Savitt stated: “We are here today not because OpenAI betrayed its mission, but because Musk did not get what he wanted from OpenAI.” Court documents revealed that Musk had proposed acquiring 55% ownership of OpenAI, but was rejected by the co-founders, who refused to “hand the keys to artificial intelligence over to one person.” OpenAI has characterized this lawsuit as retaliation by Musk, following his failed attempt to gain control, now acting through his competitor xAI.
The most damning evidence in the trial came from a private journal entry by OpenAI President Greg Brockman in 2017, in which he wrote, “This is our only chance to get rid of Elon.” An email from co-founder Ilya Sutskever told Musk, “You’ve shown us that absolute control is extremely important to you.” Musk viewed this as the “straw that broke the camel’s back.”
The first phase of the court proceedings, concerning liability determination, is expected to conclude by mid-May, with the jury providing an advisory verdict; the second phase, focusing on remedies, is scheduled to begin on May 18, during which the judge will independently decide whether to remove Altman and Brockman, revoke the profit-oriented transition, and determine the amount of damages.
This lawsuit has attracted significant attention not only because it involves two of Silicon Valley's most prominent figures.
More importantly, it exposes the most fundamental contradiction in the AI industry: when the cost of developing superintelligent AI becomes so high that only a few companies can afford it, can “openness” still exist? If AGI truly emerges, who should it belong to? Is capitalism destined to consume idealism?
These issues have, in fact, permeated OpenAI’s entire history. In a sense, the rift between Musk and Altman is more like a microcosm of AI’s evolution in Silicon Valley over the past decade.
Initially, they all believed they were preventing the monopolization of technological power. But in the end, they took different paths—one became OpenAI’s fiercest adversary, while the other propelled OpenAI to the center of global AI power.
Today, as both sides accuse each other in court, it has become clear that this conflict may have been inevitable from the start. For OpenAI was never just a technical project—it was more like an experiment to control the core technologies of the future. And once that experiment succeeds, the war surrounding it was destined to begin.