Elon Musk is widely regarded as a visionary engineer and entrepreneur, recognized for a string of transformative ventures across multiple industries. The list of his major accomplishments includes co-founding PayPal, revolutionizing electric vehicles with Tesla, transforming space travel with SpaceX, developing brain-computer interfaces at Neuralink, leading The Boring Company for tunneling, and acquiring and rebranding Twitter to X. Most recently, Musk has made headlines for filing a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft.
The world’s richest man, who also co-founded OpenAI, is suing the ChatGPT developer and its chief executive, Sam Altman, alleging that the organisation violated its founding mission by shifting from a nonprofit to a for-profit model. According to a court filing, Musk is seeking up to $134 billion from OpenAI and Microsoft, claiming entitlement to what he characterizes as "wrongful gains" derived from his early support.
Musk contends he contributed about $38 million, roughly 60% of OpenAI’s early funding, along with strategic guidance and credibility, based on assurances that the organisation would remain a nonprofit dedicated to the public benefit.
The lawsuit accuses OpenAI co-founders Altman and Greg Brockman of deliberately orchestrating a transition to a for-profit model to enrich themselves, culminating in multibillion-dollar deals with Microsoft and a recent restructuring.
In the federal court filing, Musk claims that OpenAI gained between $65.5 billion and $109.4 billion from his early involvement between 2015 and 2018, while Microsoft gained between $13.3 billion and $25.1 billion as a result of OpenAI’s evolution.
"Without Elon Musk, there'd be no OpenAI,” said Musk’s lead trial lawyer, Steven Molo. “He provided the bulk of the seed funding, lent his reputation, and taught them all he knows about scaling a business. A pre-eminent expert quantified the value of that."
This legal clash is unfolding against the backdrop of an intensifying global competition for dominance in generative artificial intelligence. Musk’s own AI venture, xAI, and its chatbot Grok, are direct competitors to OpenAI’s products, including ChatGPT, placing the dispute at the intersection of legal, technological, and commercial rivalry.
OpenAI, Altman, and Brockman have denied all allegations, characterizing Musk as “a frustrated commercial competitor seeking to slow down a mission-driven market leader.” They have labeled the lawsuit “baseless” and part of a broader campaign of harassment. Microsoft has likewise rejected the claims, with its legal counsel stating there is no evidence the company “aided and abetted” any wrongdoing by OpenAI.
Musk, who departed OpenAI’s board in 2018, alleges that the organization’s recent restructuring — designed to allow outside investment — represents a clear breach of its original charter. That restructuring has also fueled speculation about OpenAI’s long-term plans, including an upcoming IPO.
A judge in Oakland, California, ruled this month that the case will proceed to a jury trial, currently expected to begin in April 2026. Musk’s filing reiterates that he helped recruit early staff, connected OpenAI’s founders with key industry contacts, and provided essential credibility at a time when the organization was still an unproven startup.
Musk’s expert witness, financial economist C. Paul Wazzan, prepared the valuation figures cited in the lawsuit. OpenAI and Microsoft have moved to limit or exclude his testimony, arguing that the analysis is “unverifiable,” “unprecedented,” and based on “implausible” assumptions that seek to justify a massive transfer of wealth from a nonprofit entity to a former donor who is now a direct competitor.
At the same time, the defendants’ strategy of portraying the lawsuit as a nuisance rather than a substantive legal threat could influence both public perception and the jury’s view of Musk’s motives. The dispute has also raised questions about potential spillover effects on Musk’s other businesses, particularly Tesla stock, which has shown sensitivity to prolonged legal and reputational controversies involving its CEO.
Ultimately, this lawsuit stands as one of the most ambitious and complex legal battles the technology sector has seen in recent years. As the courtroom drama unfolds, public and investor attention will remain firmly fixed on a case that could reshape the future of artificial intelligence governance and commercialization.
