In Musk v. Altman trial, the entire AI industry lost
The biggest tech trial of the AI era — which ended anticlimactically Monday on procedural grounds — revealed a sector consumed by the same power struggles and profit motives its leaders once warned would corrupt artificial intelligence.
Why it matters: The trial cemented a growing public fear about AI: that the people racing to control the world’s most powerful technology are driven less by humanity-saving ideals than by money, power and personal rivalries.
The big picture: OpenAI’s founders originally positioned themselves as an alternative to Google DeepMind, fearing a single tech giant would monopolize transformative AI systems.
- But testimony and internal documents showed the organization’s leaders quickly became consumed by power struggles.
- OpenAI executives worried in 2017 that Elon Musk “could become a dictator” and sent him an email with the subject line “honest thoughts.” Musk responded saying “I’ve had enough” and later suggested the company be folded into Tesla.
- Among the court documents were texts Sam Altman sent during his brief 2023 ouster, including him pleading repeatedly to attend board meetings and being rejected. The trial also confirmed reports that OpenAI met with Anthropic to discuss a potential merger at that time.
What they’re saying: “Does anybody really believe that love of humanity is driving any of this? It’s power,” Anthony Aguirre, CEO of the Future of Life Institute, which focuses on AI governance, told Axios.
- The trial “may be over, but the real choice is still ahead of us: whether AI becomes infrastructure that serves the public, or a set of products that lock us in,” Raffi Krikorian, chief technology officer at Mozilla, said in an email.
Catch up quick: Jurors unanimously ruled that Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI, Altman, co-founder Greg Brockman and Microsoft was barred by the statute of limitations.
- Musk’s side argued OpenAI abandoned its founding nonprofit mission by accepting billions of dollars in backing from Microsoft and creating a for-profit arm. (Musk originally provided funding, but left the company after founding members refused to give him more control.)
- The trial ended with “a predictable whimper” over procedure, Ray Seilie, a trial attorney with expertise in tech and corporate law, told Axios. He added that the central question posed by the lawsuit went unanswered: how much freedom nonprofits have to restructure after making commitments to donors and the public.
- Musk vowed to appeal, writing on X that the verdict creates “a precedent to loot charities.”
Between the lines: The trial exposed how far the industry’s leaders have drifted from their original rhetoric about building AI for humanity’s sake — for example, by prioritizing the safety and best use cases for AI models over the ability to profit from them.
- The figures in the trial underline the need to pursue alternatives to the current concentration of power among a handful of AI companies and executives, Krikorian added.
- This comes as public trust in AI is nosediving. Public approval of AI now trails that of both the war in Iran and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Yes, but: Even if neither side came out looking good, Altman still emerges on stronger footing.
- Had Musk won, Altman could have been pushed out of OpenAI again, just as he was in 2023, PitchBook analyst Harrison Rolfes told Axios.
- Instead, OpenAI can keep expanding without the immediate threat of Musk forcing changes through the courts.
The bottom line: The trial showed AI critics another example of “the corrupting influence of large piles of money,” Aguirre said.
المصدر: Axios
