## Sources

1. [Altman: Musk Wanted 90% of OpenAI From the Start](https://awesomeagents.ai/news/altman-musk-openai-trial-90-percent/)

---

### **Altman: Musk Wanted 90% of OpenAI From the Start | Author: Daniel Okafor**

**Main Arguments**
*   **Musk's Control Demands:** Sam Altman testified that during the founding of OpenAI, Elon Musk's opening position was a demand for **90% of the equity** and majority control [1, 2]. While this demand "softened" over time, Altman stated that Musk's goal was always to maintain a majority stake [2]. 
*   **Breach of Charitable Trust:** The central legal argument of the trial is not whether Musk deserved control, but whether **ordinary donors and early supporters were defrauded** of a charitable promise when OpenAI converted from a nonprofit to a for-profit entity [3].
*   **Necessity of the Conversion:** Altman defended the for-profit shift by arguing it was a **functional necessity** rather than an opportunistic move, claiming he could not have raised the required capital—estimated at $200 billion—within a nonprofit structure [3].
*   **The Role of Microsoft:** Microsoft is positioned as a "quiet third rail" in the trial, accused of being an **aider and abetter** to the alleged breach of charitable trust through its roughly $13 billion investment and cloud exclusivity arrangements [4, 5].

**Key Takeaways**
*   **Reframing the Narrative:** The revelation of Musk’s initial 90% equity demand significantly reframes the lawsuit, which Musk initiated by claiming OpenAI betrayed its original mission [1].
*   **Dynastic Intentions:** Altman testified that Musk also demanded that **control of the organization pass to his children** in the event of his death while running it [6, 7].
*   **Disparity in Stakes:** There is a massive gap between Musk's initial demands and his actual contribution; he donated **$38 million** to the nonprofit and received zero equity, yet he is now seeking **$150 billion in damages** [7, 8].
*   **High Financial Stakes:** OpenAI is currently valued at **$852 billion**, and a potential IPO could see that valuation exceed **$1 trillion** [6, 9]. The outcome of the trial could force a renegotiation of the nonprofit arm's stake before any public offering [10].

**Important Details**
*   **The 2023 Firing:** Cross-examination resurfaced Altman’s temporary removal by the board in November 2023 [8]. Internal memos from former chief scientist Ilya Sutskever cited a **"consistent pattern of lying,"** and former board member Helen Toner testified to a "pattern of behavior" that led to the firing [11].
*   **Altman's Response to Trust Issues:** When asked directly by Musk’s lawyer if he was "completely trustworthy," Altman affirmed that he believes he is an **"honest and trustworthy businessperson"** and characterized his 2023 firing as a "miscommunication" [11].
*   **Political Ambitions:** Musk’s legal team introduced the detail that Altman considered **running for governor of California** in 2017 to argue his motivations were personal and ambitious rather than mission-driven [4].
*   **Satya Nadella’s Testimony:** The Microsoft CEO testified that Musk **never directly raised concerns** to him regarding the Microsoft-OpenAI investment partnership [4].
*   **Legal Decision Maker:** While an advisory jury is present, **Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers** will make the final determination on whether the 2025 for-profit conversion was legally permissible under charitable trust law [3, 10].
*   **Current Status:** Closing arguments for the trial, which began on April 28 in an Oakland federal courthouse, are scheduled for **Thursday, May 14, 2026** [6, 8, 10].