Musk v. Altman week 2: OpenAI fires back, and Shivon Zilis reveals that Musk tried to poach Sam Altman
US litigation drama around OpenAI's founding history - no immediate relevance to Australian AI governance or APS practice.
Key points
- Court testimony reveals early OpenAI power struggles between Musk and cofounders over equity and board control.
- The case centres on US corporate governance disputes - no direct Australian regulatory or policy parallel exists.
- Low signal for APS readers; this is courtroom drama rather than AI governance or policy substance.
Summary
Week two of the Musk v. Altman trial produced dramatic courtroom testimony from OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman, describing Elon Musk's demands for majority equity, board control, and CEO authority over a proposed for-profit OpenAI entity in 2017. Brockman testified that Musk stormed out of negotiations when equal equity was proposed. The case is being argued in a US court and concerns the founding intentions of a private US AI company.
"Musk v. Altman week 2: OpenAI fires back, and Shivon Zilis reveals that Musk tried to poach Sam Altman" Source: MIT Technology Review – AI Published: 8 May 2026 URL: https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/05/08/1137008/musk-v-altman-week-2-openai-fires-back-and-shivon-zilis-reveals-that-musk-tried-to-poach-sam-altman/ Week two of the Musk v. Altman trial produced dramatic courtroom testimony from OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman, describing Elon Musk's demands for majority equity, board control, and CEO authority over a proposed for-profit OpenAI entity in 2017. Brockman testified that Musk stormed out of negotiations when equal equity was proposed. The case is being argued in a US court and concerns the founding intentions of a private US AI company. Retrieved from SIMS, 18 May 2026.