NBC News99%
Elon Musk's lawyer accuses OpenAI CEO of putting profit over people 96%
5/13/2026, 12:00:15 AM
BS Summary: This video contains 37 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Ad Hominem, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 31.8% saturation with 310 hits. Analysis detected 2,742 faulty-reasoning hits from 975 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 93.3% and a BS Rank of 96% (783 of 16,813 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 95.30% of the video peer group.
So, an attorney for the richest man in
the world today is trying to paint the head of Open AI as somebody who put
profit over people during
cross-examination in a bombshell trial
pitting billionaire against billionaire.
Elon Musk, right? His head lawyer pulled up these old emails where Sam Altman told Microsoft execs Open AI would do everything it could to make them commercially successful.
Here's the backstory in all this, right? Like let's cuz it's drama.
Can we be honest? It is just juicy drama in the tech world.
Microsoft was a big backer of Open AI, the parent company of ChatGPT.
So, Microsoft poured billions of dollars into the company.
Musk's attorney here is trying to get at what's the root of this big trial.
Cuz remember, Musk also invested in Open AI as well.
When Open AI was a was a nonprofit when the startup first launched.
According to Musk, it was Sam Altman who betrayed the original mission when he turned it into a for-profit instead.
Here's the thing, this is not just a trial about some decade-old beef between these two rich people.
Turns out this has the potential to totally change the AI landscape,
maybe. Brian Cheung is joining us now.
You know I'm obsessed with this trial. I think it is so interesting. It is just like the it's the airing of grievances, but it's also about something that we have been told repeatedly is going to revolutionize the way that we interact with the world for generations to come.
And these are the these are two people who are at the forefront of that, right?
Of the of the AI revolution here. Musk, when he was on the stand, was kind of combative during cross. Less so with Sam Altman, right?
Yeah, and and then maybe that's in part because this is towards the end of at least the testimony before the jury ends up taking over.
Closing statements are expected on Thursday, but another big part of it is is that again, it's Elon Musk that's suing Sam Altman here, not that's suing Sam Altman here, not vice versa.
So, it makes sense that Elon Musk had 3 days of testimony, whereas Altman, we got everything wrapped up and put a bow on it in one single day of testimony.
That was today. But again, I think the meat of the testimony is what needs to be in focus here.
And what Elon Musk's lawyers tried to do with Sam Altman is paint a portrait of this particular person as a liar.
The first question out of this cross-examination was are have you ever lied?
And Sam Altman said at some point in his life, yes, certainly he had. Why is that relevant?
Because again, if Elon Musk is arguing that he lost $38 million to Sam Altman under the premises that that was going to be part of a non-profit for OpenAI and then Sam Altman double-crossed him by turning it into a for-profit company,
well, then that might help Elon Musk case in trying to convince a jury and this judge to say, Sam Altman took my money, he stole a charity, and for that
reason they need to pay up big time.
Another big moment, there was an a moment where OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said clearly there had been misunderstandings and a breakdown of trust.
I feel badly for the misunderstandings. What is he talking about there? He's talking about that moment in 2023, Halley, where he was booted as CEO of OpenAI.
That has been very much a focal point of this particular case because Sam Altman was deemed untrustworthy by members of his own board, and Elon Musk wants to play into that, but Altman's saying that was just a misunderstanding.
Did Altman understand scoring like what experts would consider like points that might be helpful when it comes to the judge and the jury looking at this?
Well, what Altman is trying to say here is that Elon Musk is trying to wrestle control of OpenAI during a time where he has his own competitor, which is of course xAI, which is pursuing its own models, which I should point out is also a for-profit company.
Now, interestingly, Sam Altman's defense here is again trying to convince a jury, but also a judge.
This is an advisory panel that's going to help a judge figure out what they want to do.
Ultimately, it's on the judge's decision over who he wants to rule for.
But this is a really fascinating case because again, what we're talking about here are two people that very clearly don't like each other.
Sam Altman has been described as scam Altman on X by Elon Musk, but character assassination is very much going to be a part of this with, oh, I don't know, the fate of artificial intelligence and potentially humanity at stake here.
Oh, is that all Brian? Explain that all Brian? Explain that
piece, [clears throat] right? Like what are the ramifications? What happens if
Altman comes out on top? What happens if Musk comes out on top?
Well, Musk would want OpenAI to pay up over $130 billion to the nonprofit.
Elon would not get that money, but again, we'll see what a judge rules at the end of this.
Could be soon.
All right. Brian Cheung, um super interesting.
Come back uh as soon as we know more uh when it relates to closings and uh a a verdict, if you will, in this civil thing.
Appreciate you. Thanks, Brian.
We thank you for watching and remember, stay updated on breaking news and top stories on the NBC News app or watch live on our YouTube channel.
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.