Elon Musk’strial against OpenAI and Microsoft entered its final stretch on Monday, with testimony from Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, and current OpenAI chairman Bret Taylor.
Sutskever drew the spotlight, revealing an ownership stake in OpenAI’s $850-billion for-profit arm that is currently worth about $7 billion. That makes him one of the largest known individual shareholders of OpenAI. Earlier in the trial, OpenAI president Greg Brockman acknowledged for the first time that he has around $30 billion worth of OpenAI shares.
Brockman was one of the research lab’s original cofounders, and Sutskever joined shortly afterward, turning down a $6 million annual compensation offer from Google. Brockman said he and Sutskever were “joined at the hip,” until Sutskever helped lead Sam Altman’s brief removal as OpenAI CEO in 2023. Sutskever had helped collect evidence to show Altman’s alleged history of deception, and even assisted in drafting a memo to the board. Though they tried to repair the relationship, Sutskever has been estranged from Brockman and Altman ever since, a lawyer for OpenAI said on Monday.
Sutskever, who arrived in the courtroom wearing a dress shirt and slacks, the first male witness to testify without a suit jacket, appeared to be dejected about no longer being involved with OpenAI. (He left and formed a competing AI lab in 2024.) “I felt a great deal of ownership of OpenAI,” he said at one point Monday. “I felt like I put my life into it, and I simply cared for it, and I didn’t want it to be destroyed.”
Sutskever’s testimony bolstered Musk’s contention that Altman is not the right person to lead an AI lab that could create artificial general intelligence. In addition, Sutskever mentioned how the superalignment team he helped lead, which focused on the safety of future models, was doing the most important work at OpenAI “for the long term.” The team was disbanded in May 2024, shortly after Sutskever left the company.
But Sutskever also added to OpenAI’s defense that Musk never negotiated any special promises when funding the OpenAI nonprofit. Musk’s allegation that such commitments existed and that Altman and Brockman violated them by pursuing a lucrative for-profit arm are the core of his claims in the lawsuit. Sutskever said OpenAI needed “a lot of dollars” to build a computer as big as the human brain, and while seeking donations had some “reasonable success,” becoming a for-profit was the consensus way forward.
“I would describe it as the difference between an ant and a cat,” Sutskever said in response to a question from US district judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers about how more computing helped OpenAI level up. “If there’s no funding, there is no big computer.”
In the end, Sutskever, a prominent AI scientist who paints in his spare time, testified for about an hour, barely making eye contact with anyone during his time on the witness stand.
Musk’s legal team had unsuccessfully sought to treat Sutskever as a hostile witness because of his financial stake in OpenAI. But Gonzalez Rogers agreed to give attorneys for both Musk and OpenAI extra leeway in their questioning of Sutskever due to what she described as his “unique position” in the case.
The Blip
Much of Monday’s testimony centered around the well-covered events of Altman’s ouster and reinstatement as CEO in November 2023. Nadella described Sutskever and other board members firing Altman as “amateur city” and reiterated that he “never got clarity” about the lack of candor that led to their decision. Nadella also acknowledged during his testimony that he and colleagues discussed 14 potential board members who would join OpenAI if Altman returned, including at least two whom the Microsoft group vetoed and one who later joined. Nadella described Microsoft’s input as suggestions.
Sutskever said he supported firing Altman because an “environment where executives don’t have the correct information” is not “conducive to reach any grand goal.” But he criticized his board colleagues for rushing the process, lacking experience, and accepting “legal advice that wasn’t very good.”
Microsoft’s Bet
In his lawsuit, Musk accused Microsoft of helping to transform OpenAI into a moneymaking machine beyond what Musk intended. Nadella testified that Microsoft had first supported OpenAI with discounted cloud computing but it could no longer afford to do so “once the bill started going up.” A for-profit arm that Microsoft could invest in, in exchange for a potential financial return, was more palatable.
But as the years progressed and the bills kept rising, Microsoft wanted more out of the partnership. Microsoft “will lose 4 bil next year!!!” Nadella exclaimed in an email in 2022 to his lieutenants about the OpenAI partnership. He called for a new agreement ensuring Microsoft would also get AI “know-how” from the startup, which he kept spelling as “Open AI.”
