Completely fell out! OpenAI's official court debate turns to "personal attacks": Musk "doesn't understand AI and is irritable," Altman "has poor character and is hypocritical."
A super AI giant with a valuation approaching a trillion dollars is being completely "stripped bare" in a California courtroom.
The century trial of Musk suing OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has entered its second week. What began as a serious business lawsuit concerning "the fate of humanity and AI safety" has now completely gone off track, evolving into an executive "catfight" and personal attacks.
The judge bluntly stated:
In the end, this trial simply comes down to whether the jury is willing to believe whom.
Based on the current court records, OpenAI's core founding team is exposing their most shameful sides to the world, without reservation.
Former CTO Exposes Altman's "Toxic Culture" and Lies
This was the most shocking scene to the outside world—OpenAI’s former technical leader, Mira Murati, who spearheaded the launch of GPT-4 and ChatGPT, broke her silence on the witness stand.
Her sudden departure in 2024 stirred countless speculations. In this trial’s video testimony, she directly targeted her former boss Altman. Murati accused Altman in court of lying to her about the safety approval process for new models.
At the time, Altman told her that the legal department head, Jason Kwon, said there was no need for the safety board to review new models. But upon personally verifying, Murati found their statements were "entirely different things."
Murati stated in court that Altman had long caused "chaos and mistrust" within the executive team. He is adept at using shrewd management tactics, selectively disclosing key information, giving different versions of facts to different executives, muddying safety approval nodes, and ultimately ensuring all judgment rights are firmly in his own hands.
Board members who voted to remove Altman, Tasha McCauley and Helen Toner, also submitted similar testimony. They described the corporate culture Altman created as a "toxic culture" of habitual lying and deception.
McCauley stated that Altman’s dishonest acts triggered a "crisis event" every few months; he even spread false rumors to manipulate the board.
Former Chief Scientist Ilya once detailed Altman’s various lies and resulting chaos in a multi-page email.
Wall Street News previously mentioned, Anthropic CEO and OpenAI co-founder Dario Amodei wrote in his private notes:
OpenAI’s problem is Sam himself.
Counterattack on Musk: Doesn't Understand AI, Bad-Tempered "Raging Maniac"
Faced with fierce attacks from Musk’s side, the Altman camp struck back without mercy, mainly targeting Musk's professional ability and emotional control.
OpenAI President Greg Brockman stated in court that as early as 2017, when OpenAI underwent internal power struggles, their major "concern" was Musk’s fundamental lack of the technical capability to lead AI’s development.
Brockman unceremoniously mocked in court:
Look, he understands rockets, he understands electric cars, but he doesn't understand artificial intelligence, and I believe he still doesn't.
He pointed out Musk simply wasn’t willing to take the time to truly grasp AI technology.
Brockman also vividly described Musk’s "explosive temper" to the jury. Recalling a restructuring meeting in August 2017, Musk suddenly lost control.
He stood up, marched angrily around the table. I really thought he was going to hit me, really believed he might physically attack me.
In the end, Musk grabbed a newly received painting as a gift and stormed out.
Wall Street News previously mentioned, this Wednesday, in testimony from Musk’s ex-girlfriend and former OpenAI board member Shivon Zilis, she indirectly confirmed the breakdown in executive communication.
She admitted Musk and the founding team "were sometimes very poor at communication," and with tough issues, they even had to pick moments when Musk was "in a good mood and clear-headed" to talk to him.
Zilis further testified that Musk once hoped to merge OpenAI into Tesla and offered Altman a Tesla board seat as leverage. This testimony touched on Musk's core accusation that OpenAI betrayed its commitment to being non-profit.
$100 Million Heavy Pressure, Captured by Microsoft
Aside from the executives’ melodrama, the trial actually reveals how OpenAI abandoned its original non-profit intent to "benefit all humanity," becoming a vassal of capital.
(OpenAI charter: Its responsibility is to all humanity)
The trial exposed a key moment: In 2022, before ChatGPT's release, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella explicitly told Altman that OpenAI must earn $100 million in revenue to qualify for Microsoft's next $10 billion investment.
For the sake of this $10 billion, Altman accepted the condition and pressured teams internally to make it a core goal. Former CTO Murati confirmed the company began large-scale commercial expansion for this target.
And in the face of business interests, AI safety became completely just for show.
Former safety researcher Rosie Campbell testified that as the company became increasingly product-centered, two teams dedicated to long-term AI safety were ultimately disbanded. The so-called OpenAI "Deployment Safety Board (DSB)" is even more ironic.
This body, supposedly tasked with controlling AI model release safety, was rules-designed like a "collusion": The committee has 6 members—Microsoft holds 3 seats, OpenAI has 3 seats, 4 votes are needed for approval. Altman is one of OpenAI's 3.
This means, as long as "3 Microsoft members + Altman = 4 votes," any model can be forcibly deployed, and internal safety dissenters at OpenAI are virtually useless.
To circumvent process, Altman even lied directly to Murati that GPT-4 Turbo didn’t need DSB review.
A Hollowed-Out Non-Profit Shell
Musk’s predictions from years ago are seemingly being proven one by one in court: "OpenAI is no longer open."
Now, OpenAI’s non-profit entity has become an empty shell with almost no real power or assets, holding just 26% equity in the for-profit company. All top talent, core technology, and valuable assets have been transferred to the for-profit entity.
In court, a surreal scene unfolded.
OpenAI president Brockman, over five hours of testimony, admitted to each element of "unjust enrichment" and "breach of fiduciary duty." Yet, when asked by the plaintiff's attorney if he knew why he was being sued, he feigned ignorance before the jury, repeatedly claiming "not sure."
When the lawyer directly accused him of "violating the charitable mission of developing safe AI with open source method and not for personal profit," Brockman could only feebly retort: "We did not do that."
Q: Does this lawsuit prevent you from releasing the new charter?
Brockman: Honestly, I've never been quite sure why I was sued.
Q: You're not sure? Have you read the complaint?
Brockman: Very carefully.
Q: They hired some very famous lawyers at a well-known law firm—and they've never explained to you why you're being sued?
Brockman: I understand the allegations. I've seen how they've changed over time. But—
Q: So you do understand?
Brockman: I stand by my testimony.
Q: I thought you said you didn’t know why you were being sued.
Brockman: That’s what I said. Yes.
Q: Do you stand by that testimony?
Brockman: Yes.
The lawyer then directly stated the charge: Q: You’re being sued because you breached your fiduciary duty to the charity, not following the mission you just announced to the world on the website. Do you understand?
Brockman: Oh, I just disagree with that.
Q: You don’t have the right to disagree. I’m asking you. You said you didn’t understand why you’re being sued, so I’m telling you: you’re being sued for violating OPENAI’s charitable mission—to develop safe general AI on an open-source basis to benefit humanity, and no individual may profit from it. Do you understand that’s the reason you’re being sued?
Brockman: That’s not what we did.
This onion-peeling courtroom debate restored the full picture of power games full of lies and calculation within OpenAI.
Next week, Altman—the center of the storm—will personally testify. The most expensive and naked power game in tech history is about to reach its final climax.
Risk warning and disclaimerThe market carries risks, and investment should be made cautiously. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation or needs of any individual user. Users should consider whether any opinions, views or conclusions herein are appropriate for their circumstance. Invest accordingly, and bear personal responsibility.