A California jury has tossed out Elon Musk's high-profile lawsuit against OpenAI and its boss, Sam Altman. In a unanimous verdict, the jury agreed that Musk had waited too long to file his lawsuit, leaving all of his claims essentially expired.
Musk had accused Altman of breaching a non-profit contract by shifting the ChatGPT-maker to a for-profit company after Musk donated $38 million (£28.5 million) early in OpenAI's history.
Musk claimed Altman had deceived him by accepting his money and then reneging on OpenAI's original non-profit mission to develop artificial intelligence (AI) technology for the benefit of humanity.
Jurors spent just about two hours on Monday deliberating on the case, but they had spent three weeks viewing internal correspondence and hearing testimony from Musk, Altman, and other tech industry executives, such as Microsoft's chief executive Satya Nadella.
Musk had accused Microsoft of aiding and abetting OpenAI in its allegedly improper transition to a more for-profit company.
Musk's other claims against Microsoft were dismissed as a matter of law given the jury's findings on the two claims against OpenAI.
A spokesperson for Microsoft said of the verdict: The facts and the timeline in this case have long been clear, adding that the company remains committed to its work with OpenAI.
The jury's decision adds to a string of recent losses and settlements for Musk in court.
Within hours of the verdict, Musk criticized the decision against him, claiming it created a free license to loot charities if you can keep the looting quiet for a few years! He also described the presiding judge as a terrible activist who used the jury as a fig leaf.
Musk vowed to file an appeal, arguing that the jury did not decide the case on its merits and that the decision was based on a calendar technicality.
The jury found that the statute of limitations, a set timeframe for when legal accusations need to be made, had lapsed for Musk's claims of breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment, which meant the jury was not required to consider the merits of his claims.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, noted that the jurors had made a very fact-based decision about the case. This case seemed kind of weird and crazy, but this is why we trust juries, because they bring the common sense of the community to resolve factual disputes, he added.
During the trial, Musk emphasized that his suit was about the integrity of charitable foundations, stating, It's not OK to steal a charity... If it's okay to loot a charity, the entire foundation of charitable giving will be destroyed.
Altman testified that Musk had supported OpenAI's shift to a for-profit model and had in fact sought to control the organization for the long term. Musk's tensions with Altman date back to his departure from OpenAI in 2018.
Sam Singer, a spokesman for OpenAI, referred to the verdict as a tremendous victory, claiming it was merely an effort by Musk to hinder a competitor. Musk's attorney responded by saying, This war is not over, and I'd sum it up in one word: appeal.”
