On the stand, Elon Musk can’t escape his own tweets

```json { "title": "Elon Musk vs. OpenAI Trial: Day 2 Testimony", "metaDescription": "Elon Musk faced cross-examination on his own tweets during Day 2 of his landmark lawsuit against OpenAI, Sam Altman, and Microsoft in Oakland.", "content": "<h2>Musk's Own Words Take Center Stage in OpenAI Lawsuit</h2><p>Elon Musk returned to the stand on April 29, 2026, for a second consecutive day of testimony in his high-stakes lawsuit against OpenAI, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and Microsoft — a case that could fundamentally reshape the artificial intelligence industry. The trial is underway at the Ronald V. Dellums U.S. Courthouse, part of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in Oakland, with a nine-person jury advising U.S. District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.</p><p>The lawsuit, which Musk filed against the AI organization he co-founded in 2015, seeks the reversion of OpenAI to a nonprofit structure, the removal of Altman and Brockman from OpenAI's board, and approximately $130 billion in damages directed back into OpenAI's nonprofit foundation. Microsoft is named as a co-defendant, with Musk alleging the tech giant aided and abetted OpenAI's alleged breach of charitable trust through its investments and partnerships.</p><p>Day 2 proved particularly uncomfortable for Musk as opposing counsel turned his own social media history into a legal weapon during cross-examination — raising pointed questions about the timing and motivation behind his suit.</p><h2>Musk's Tweets and Past Actions Complicate His Case</h2><p>The most damaging moment of Day 2 came when Microsoft's lawyer, Russell Cohen, highlighted a September 2020 post on X — the platform formerly known as Twitter and now owned by Musk — in which Musk himself wrote that "OpenAI is essentially captured by Microsoft." Cohen argued that this post demonstrated Musk was fully aware of the Microsoft-OpenAI relationship years before he filed the current lawsuit, potentially placing the suit outside the applicable statute of limitations.</p><p>The cross-examination did not stop there. Evidence introduced at trial also showed that Musk directed his family office head, Jared Birchall, to register a for-profit public benefit corporation in OpenAI's name back in 2017. Musk testified that he did so "in case it was needed" — an explanation that OpenAI's legal team used to undercut his argument that he was consistently and categorically opposed to any for-profit structure for the organization.</p><p>These revelations placed Musk in the difficult position of defending a narrative of principled opposition to commercialization while the court reviewed evidence suggesting he had at least contemplated a for-profit path for OpenAI himself.</p><p>Judge Gonzalez Rogers had already signaled her impatience with Musk's courtroom conduct on Day 1, scolding him for social media posts about the ongoing case and threatening a gag order before the jury arrived in the courtroom. That tension carried into Day 2 as his past public statements continued to surface as evidence.</p><h2>Competing Narratives: Stolen Charity or Competitive Grudge?</h2><p>The trial has crystallized around two sharply opposed arguments about why Musk filed the lawsuit in the first place.</p><p>Musk's legal team, led by attorney Steve Molo, opened the trial with a sweeping moral accusation: <strong>"Ladies and gentlemen, we are here today because the defendants in this case stole a charity,"</strong> Molo told jurors, according to NPR. The argument rests on OpenAI's founding charter from 2015 — entered into evidence by Musk's lawyers — which declared that OpenAI would seek to create "open source technology for the public benefit" and was "not organized for the private gain of any person."</p><p>Musk contributed $38 million in funding to OpenAI from December 2015 through May 2017, according to CBS News. On the stand, he testified: <strong>"I came up with the idea, the name, recruited the key people, taught them everything I know, provided all the initial funding."</strong> He argued that OpenAI's pivot toward a for-profit model — and specifically its deepening financial relationship with Microsoft — represented a betrayal of the original mission he helped establish.</p><p>Musk testified that the moment he lost faith came in 2022, when OpenAI announced a $10 billion investment from Microsoft that valued the company at $20 billion. He told the court that this was the moment he "lost trust in Altman" and believed "they were really trying to steal the charity," according to CNN. He also testified that an offer of an equity stake in OpenAI made by Altman felt, in his words, like a bribe: <strong>"Frankly, it felt like a bribe."</strong></p><p>OpenAI's legal team, led by attorney William Savitt, offered an entirely different framing. In his opening statement, Savitt told the jury: <strong>"We are here because Mr. Musk turned out to be very wrong about OpenAI. We're here now because Mr. Musk now competes with OpenAI."</strong> Savitt further argued that Musk's real motivation was control — and that when he couldn't have it, he left and built a competitor. <strong>"What he cares about is Elon Musk being at the top,"</strong> Savitt stated, according to NPR.</p><p>The competitive dimension of the case is difficult to ignore. Musk split from OpenAI in 2018 following an internal power struggle, and a year after his departure, OpenAI created a for-profit subsidiary to raise additional capital. In 2023, Musk launched his own competing AI company, xAI. OpenAI is now valued at $852 billion, according to ABC7, while Microsoft has invested more than $13 billion in the organization since 2019, according to CNBC.</p><h2>What the Lawsuit Means for AI and the Tech Industry</h2><p>The stakes of Musk v. OpenAI extend well beyond the two central figures. A ruling in Musk's favor — particularly one that forces OpenAI back to a purely nonprofit structure or removes its current leadership — could have profound consequences for OpenAI's plans for a potential initial public offering and for the broader competitive landscape of the global AI industry.</p><p>OpenAI's transformation from a nonprofit research lab into one of the most valuable private companies in the world is at the heart of the dispute. Its 2015 founding charter explicitly barred private enrichment, yet the company's for-profit subsidiary has attracted tens of billions in investment and made its leadership figures enormously wealthy. Musk's lawsuit, regardless of its ultimate outcome, has forced a very public reckoning with how the organization reconciles those two identities.</p><p>Microsoft's position as a co-defendant adds another layer of complexity. The tech giant's deep financial entanglement with OpenAI — including its integration of OpenAI technology into products like Copilot — means that any structural changes to OpenAI could ripple across Microsoft's product strategy and valuation as well.</p><p>Musk was direct about his broader concerns on the stand. <strong>"I have extreme concerns over AI,"</strong> he testified before the jury. On the question of whether OpenAI insiders should profit from the nonprofit's transformation, he was equally blunt: <strong>"They should not get rich off a nonprofit, that's not right."</strong> And on what he sees as OpenAI's contradiction in maintaining its nonprofit branding while operating as a for-profit enterprise, Musk testified: <strong>"But what you can't do is have your cake and eat it too."</strong></p><p>The trial has also drawn in expert witnesses on both sides. Musk's expert witnesses include Stuart J. Russell, a science professor and AI researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, and David M. Schizer, a Columbia Law professor and dean emeritus, according to NPR.</p><h2>What Comes Next in the OpenAI Trial</h2><p>The trial is expected to last approximately three to four weeks, according to NPR and CBS News. Jurors are expected to begin deliberating on liability by mid-May 2026, according to Fox Business. Testimony from Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella is anticipated during the proceedings.</p><p>Each of those witnesses carries significant potential to shift the narrative. Altman's testimony, in particular, will be closely watched: OpenAI's legal team has built its defense around the argument that Musk's claims are driven by competitive jealousy rather than principle, and Altman's account of the organization's evolution — and of his relationship with Musk — will be central to that defense.</p><p>For Musk, the challenge ahead is to reconcile the version of events he is presenting in court with a documented paper trail that includes his own social media posts, his 2017 instruction to register a for-profit entity in OpenAI's name, and his eventual decision to launch a direct competitor to the organization he is now suing. Whether the jury finds that trail exculpatory or damning will go a long way toward determining the outcome of one of the most consequential technology lawsuits in recent memory.</p><p>For more tech news, visit our <a href=\"/news\">news section</a>.</p>", "excerpt": "Elon Musk took the stand for a second day on April 29, 2026, in his landmark lawsuit against OpenAI, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and Microsoft — and his own past tweets became some of the most damaging evidence against him. The trial, unfolding at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in Oakland, seeks $130 billion in damages and could force OpenAI back to a nonprofit structure. The outcome may reshape the global AI industry and threaten OpenAI's path to an IPO.", "keywords": ["Elon Musk OpenAI lawsuit", "OpenAI trial 2026", "Musk vs Altman", "OpenAI nonprofit", "AI industry legal battle"], "slug": "elon-musk-openai-trial-day-2-testimony" } ```