The lawsuit between Elon Musk and Sam Altman: Feuds among tycoons and public anxiety

After Musk lost the lawsuit, when the defendant's lawyer expressed his thoughts outside the courtroom, the TV screen broadcast by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) was occupied by a huge protest sign. The sign read: "Stop AI (Artificial Intelligence) Thieves."

The protesters' anger obviously refers to the fact that the rapidly developing artificial intelligence has taken away human jobs.

Who did the world's richest man, Musk, sue? It was another billionaire, Altman, the CEO of the world's most well - known AI company, OpenAI. OpenAI is the company that developed ChatGPT, the first chatbot in human history.

But in a sense, with the fear and disgust of ordinary Americans towards "AI thieves", both the plaintiff Musk and the defendant Altman have become defendants in the court of public opinion.

01

The Feud of Tech Tycoons

A description of this "AI trial of the century" by an American newspaper reveals its significance, absurdity, and why it has attracted so much global attention: "One of the two most controversial and over - exposed people in the world today is suing the other, who is equally repulsive and inescapable. Both are extremely wealthy."

The drama and reversals in the relationship between Musk and Altman are no less than those in the 21st - century version of *The Count of Monte Cristo*. The evolution of their relationship is a story of a tech tycoon's feud, from a honeymoon period, a break - up, to a court battle.

Nearly 20 years ago, Musk and Altman got to know each other. Later, out of their common concern about Google's monopoly in AI and potential safety hazards, they hit it off and jointly founded the non - profit organization OpenAI in 2015, aiming to develop general artificial intelligence (AGI) that benefits all of humanity. As the core investor, Musk injected $38 million.

Around 2017, a rift emerged between them. As the R & D costs soared, Musk tried to take control of OpenAI and incorporate it into Tesla, but was rejected by Altman and other management. Musk then angrily quit the board of directors in 2018 and cut off subsequent funding.

From 2019 to 2023, they grew further apart. To seek funds, Altman led OpenAI to transform into a "capped - profit" company and accepted a huge investment of tens of billions from Microsoft. Musk was extremely dissatisfied with this and publicly criticized Altman for betraying the original intention many times. In 2023, Musk founded xAI to directly compete with OpenAI.

In 2024, Musk formally sued OpenAI and Altman, accusing them of "stealing a charity" for huge profits, demanding $150 billion in compensation, and asking for the removal of the relevant defendants from their management positions. The lawsuit was not formally heard until 2026 because both sides continuously added materials, revised the pleadings, filed counter - claims, and had procedural disputes, keeping the case in the pre - trial stage for a long time.

After a long - drawn - out public opinion and legal tug - of - war, on May 18, 2026, the jury ruled that Musk's lawsuit was out of the statute of limitations, and he lost the lawsuit. However, Musk's lawyer said they would reserve the right to appeal, and Musk himself also publicly stated that he would continue to appeal.

The friendship between these two most famous tech tycoons in the world eventually turned into a bitter feud and a complete break - up in court.

02

Concerned about Human Well - being or Trying to Crush Competitors?

During the three - week trial, Musk and Altman came to the court many times.

Musk took the witness stand himself and was questioned by lawyers from both sides. In his speech, he repeatedly reiterated his logic for the lawsuit, emphasizing that he initially donated generously for the well - being of humanity but was deceived by Altman and others, turning a charitable vision into a money - making tool for tech giants.

Musk claimed in the opening statement of the trial: "This is a classic textbook story of altruism against greed."

Although Altman did not sit on the witness stand to be orally questioned by lawyers from both sides on - site, he sat in the front row of the trial court for several consecutive days because the result of this lawsuit was extremely important to him and the company he led: either he would be ousted from the OpenAI management, or it would clear the way for OpenAI's listing.

OpenAI's lawyer said that Musk filed the lawsuit out of jealousy and anger, aiming to crush the competitor, rather than being concerned about human well - being and the public good.

Musk quit the company's board of directors in 2018 and asserted that the probability of this startup's success without him was zero. However, he was severely humiliated by the great success of ChatGPT. OpenAI is currently valued at $852 billion, while Musk's xAI lab has not been able to catch up so far.

OpenAI's lawyer, William Savitt, said: "Musk may have the Midas touch in some fields, but not in the AI field. The fact proves that all Musk can do to achieve success in the AI field is to take the matter to court."

OpenAI claimed that Musk chose to leave after he failed to control the entire enterprise. OpenAI said in a statement: "The core of this case has always been that Musk wants to grab more power and money for what he wants."

03

The Public Interest Obscured by the Courtroom Debate

When talking about this lawsuit, Stavros Gadinis, a professor at the School of Law of the University of California, Berkeley, said: "Musk has indeed successfully smeared Altman, but in terms of reputation, it's hard to find someone worse than Musk."

During the trial, many people protested outside the court every day. For example, a man dressed up as a cardboard Tesla, wearing a Musk mask, waving an oversized drug bag; another person was wearing an inflated Musk doll and kept giving a Nazi salute. There was also a sign that read: "Everyone here is terrible."

On Reddit, the largest social discussion platform in the English - speaking world, a popular post read: "I'm excited to see Musk lose the lawsuit, but I'm also frustrated to see Altman win. It's very tough to decide between my joy at seeing Musk lose and my misery at seeing Altman win."

However, most ordinary Americans are not keen on simply watching the "dramatic court battle" between two billionaires. Their focus is not on whose reputation is worse between Musk and Altman.

The protesters holding signs mentioned at the beginning of this article are obviously more concerned about whether AI will take away their jobs. Most ordinary Americans are also more concerned about the impact of AI on their careers and futures.

Jill Horwitz, a professor at the School of Law of Northwestern University, said, "There are indeed serious legal issues surrounding OpenAI's mission and the public interest, but the farce staged by these two billionaires in the power and money struggle has distorted and obscured the core that the law should focus on here - the public interest."

Gideon Lewis - Kraus, a full - time contributor to *The New Yorker* magazine, also believes: "Something as fragile and corruptible as personal character can never be a sufficient basis for AI governance."

Sarah Kreps, the director of the Institute of Science and Technology Policy at Cornell University, pointed out that this trial reminds people that the future of artificial intelligence still largely depends on an extremely narrow group composed of tech tycoons and their personal feuds.

Kreps believes that the end of the case on a legal technical issue like the statute of limitations leaves many unresolved issues and debates, such as how to manage AI systems and who will reap their economic benefits.

After the "AI trial of the century" ended, Karen Hao, a famous Chinese - American investigative journalist and the author of *The AI Empire*, wrote in an article: "If we focus on whether Altman is untrustworthy or whether Musk is even more untrustworthy, we will cover up a much deeper problem. If OpenAI loses its leading position in the AI industry, another almost indistinguishable competitor - Musk's xAI or other companies - will directly replace it. This includes companies like Anthropic. Although they have a better reputation, they are also engaged in many similar behaviors, such as sacrificing careful decision - making for speed, ignoring intellectual property rights, and aggressively expanding their computing power infrastructure at the expense of community interests."

Karen Hao believes that the result of this lawsuit has not changed the current situation in the AI industry, that is, the tech tycoons who control the AI empire "are eager to integrate more data and capital, reshape the earth, drain and replace the labor force, and embed themselves deeply into the state to gain influence over the violent machinery. We will still live in a world where a very small number of people hold great power, reshape the world in their own image, and dominate how billions of people live."

04

The Deep - seated AI Fear of the American Public

At present, it seems that this situation is unlikely to change, at least in the United States.

Nowadays, AI has almost won the unanimous recognition of the US Congress, the Trump administration, the courts, and Wall Street. There are many venture capitalists investing in the AI field and other people who are open to technology - industry funds in the Trump administration, and Trump himself is also among them. Although there are sporadic opposing voices among state - level regulatory agencies and individual legislators, they have not caused much of a stir so far.

However, the American public obviously has a mixed emotion of worry, doubt, fear, and anger towards the rapidly developing AI industry and the tech tycoons who monopolize this industry, and this emotion is getting stronger and stronger.

According to the results of several public opinion surveys released by the United States this spring, ordinary Americans' attitude towards the explosive development of AI has gradually changed from initial curiosity to deep - seated fear and anger. The number of Americans who are worried about AI far exceeds those who are excited about it. This emotion is not just the traditional panic of "losing jobs", but has transformed into physical protests against data centers destroying homes and strong anger towards tech tycoons using capital to kidnap public resources.

On March 12, a report released by the Pew Research Center, an independent think - tank and survey institution in the United States, showed that more than half of Americans said their emotion towards AI was "more worried than excited", and less than one - tenth of people were truly excited about AI.

On April 13, Research!America, a leading non - profit, non - partisan research and advocacy alliance in the United States, released the 2026 annual public opinion survey on AI risk perception. The survey found that more and more Americans believe that the risks brought by AI outweigh the benefits, and young people aged 18 to 24 have the strongest perception of AI risks.

The Annenberg Public Policy Center under the University of Pennsylvania released two national surveys on May 7 and May 13 respectively. The results showed that only 17% of Americans believe that AI will have a positive impact in the next decade, and 42% of respondents believe the impact will be negative; 65% of American adults said that the US government is not doing enough in AI regulation, and this view is shared by most Democrats, independents, and Republicans.

In short, several recent public opinion surveys have revealed a trend: the concerns of the American public are beginning to take on more specific forms, such as whether AI will take away jobs, whether it will exacerbate wealth concentration, whether it will consume too much energy, and whether it will damage the environment. These issues that were originally discussed by experts are quickly entering the daily context of ordinary Americans. In other words, AI is no longer just a technical issue, but a life issue, an economic issue, and even a political issue.

The judgment of the Musk v. Altman case has not touched on the more substantial issue that worries ordinary Americans - AI regulation. The end of the first - instance trial of this case will only speed up the IPO process of the companies under their respective banners, thus intensifying the anxiety of ordinary Americans.

However, one day, the increasingly strong public anxiety will eventually gradually form political pressure on tech tycoons, AI companies, and regulatory agencies.

(The author has served as a senior journalist and editor in several well - known British media. The author's WeChat official account: Wei Cheng's World View)

This article is from the WeChat official account "Caixin Magazine". Author: Wei Cheng, Editor: Jiang Wei. Republished by 36Kr with permission.