What matters (or should matter), at the Musk-OpenAI trial

I don’t know what’s going to happen; it’s a jury trial. And it’s very far from over. One view is that for all the drama nothing much has happened so far. A few minutes ago Jeremy Kahn from Fortune represented that view in his newsletter: On Kahn’s telling, “Most legal analysts say Musk’s case is weak and that he’s likely to lose. In fact, I’m surprised the case has even come to trial.” But few knew what secrets were contained in OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman’s diary,, and yesterday and today mostly centered on them. Kahn sums up some of revelations, and in my view they don’t look good: A fairly widely-followed blogger on X was withering. arguing that Brockman basically vindicated Musk’s critique, beat by beat: In my view, by vividly explaining how he deceived Musk about his commitment to the nonprofit, without a trace of remorse, OpenAI’s Brockman has done Musk’s counsel a huge favor. § So much so that yesterday there were a lot of jokes about Brockman’s diary: and § The trial is far from over; more witnesses are expected, including Satya Nadella and Sam Altman, as well as Shivon Zilis, former OpenAI board member and mother of 4 of Elon’s children, and former OpenAI CTO Mira Murati. And it’s a jury trial, so who knows what will happen. OpenAI’s counsel will continue to emphasize Musk’s character flaws; Musk’s counsel will continue to harp on OpenAI deceit. Nobody will come off well. But here’s what I (a fan neither of Musk nor OpenAI) think it boils down to: Major, fascinating correction a few hours later, courtesy a reader: The jury here is advisory only, not binding, and only advising re liability, not damages.