A high-profile legal battle between Elon Musk and OpenAI co-founder and CEO Sam Altman is set to go to trial in March.
Highlights
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers has scheduled the jury trial to begin on March 16 in Oakland, California, opting to fast-track the proceedings to ensure a timely resolution.
The decision follows her earlier ruling denying Musk’s request to pause OpenAI’s transition from a nonprofit to a for-profit structure. Judge Rogers emphasized the need to address the central question of whether the restructuring conflicts with OpenAI’s founding mission.
The lawsuit, filed by Musk in early 2024, centers on claims that OpenAI has deviated from its original purpose. Founded in 2015 as a nonprofit aimed at ensuring artificial general intelligence (AGI) benefits all of humanity, OpenAI has since adopted a “public benefit” for-profit model.
This structure allows the organization to raise capital while maintaining a stated commitment to broader societal impact.
Musk, who left OpenAI’s board in 2018, argues that the shift undermines the company’s original charter and aligns too closely with corporate interests, particularly its multibillion-dollar partnership with Microsoft.
Legal Allegations and Court Proceedings
Musk’s legal complaint accuses OpenAI and its leadership of breaching fiduciary duties and violating antitrust laws by departing from the organization’s nonprofit roots.
In response the company has filed a motion to dismiss the case, asserting that Musk’s actions are an attempt to interfere with a competitor following his departure.
The company argues that the lawsuit is not about preserving founding principles, but rather reflects Musk’s dissatisfaction with his current lack of influence over OpenAI’s direction.
The court’s decision to expedite the trial adds urgency to the ongoing restructuring process. OpenAI is currently engaged in discussions with regulators in California and Delaware to finalize its transition to a for-profit entity.
That process must be completed by the end of 2025 in order to meet conditions tied to a major funding round. Bloomberg reports that OpenAI has secured a $40 billion investment led by SoftBank, which values the company at $300 billion.
However, a portion of that funding is contingent on the successful completion of the restructuring; if delayed, SoftBank’s contribution could be reduced from $30 billion to $20 billion.
Broader Industry Implications
The outcome of the trial could have far-reaching implications for the structure and governance of AI organizations.
As AI development becomes increasingly capital-intensive, many research labs face the challenge of balancing open, mission-driven goals with the need for commercial sustainability.
The case could set a precedent for how such organizations evolve under financial and regulatory pressures.
Competing Interests and Business Strategies
Since departing from OpenAI, Musk has launched his own AI company, xAI, which was formally integrated into X (formerly Twitter) in March 2025 under the umbrella of XAI Holdings.
The combined entity is now valued at over $100 billion. Musk’s growing presence in the AI sector has added a layer of competition to the legal dispute.
In February 2025, Musk submitted an unsolicited takeover offer for OpenAI, valued at $97.4 billion. The bid was rejected by OpenAI’s board and leadership, intensifying tensions between the parties and fueling further speculation about Musk’s intentions.
OpenAI’s Business Momentum
Despite the ongoing legal proceedings, OpenAI continues to scale its operations. The organization has expanded its partnerships, accelerated the rollout of AI tools, and positioned itself as a leading player in the competitive AI landscape alongside Google, Amazon, and Meta.
The restructuring is a key part of its long-term business strategy, aimed at ensuring sustained access to funding and the ability to deliver cutting-edge AI technologies.
While the March trial is unlikely to immediately alter company’s operational trajectory, it represents a pivotal moment in the broader debate over the commercialization of artificial intelligence.
The case has evolved beyond a legal conflict between two individuals—it now underscores the tension between founding ideals and the financial realities of developing advanced AI.
As the courtroom date approaches, the outcome will be closely monitored by industry observers, investors, and regulators alike, as it may influence how AI companies structure themselves and navigate the intersection of ethics, innovation, and profitability.
