Musk vs OpenAI: Case Dismissed in 2 Hours — Not on the Facts, But on a Technicality

Indexé : 2026-05-22

[00:00:00]Guys, I know it's sort of weird, isn't it? But here in Australia, Front Page News, front page news everywhere was the Tesla CEO Elon Musk, his court case against Open AI or what you now know as Chat GPT. Now guys, I've actually stopped using Chat GPT because I found a much better solution. I found Claude is way better than Chat GPT at basically everything I've been everything I do. So just a suggestion. Anyhow, the case said Elon Musk had lost. He was lost his case. Musk was insane. He lost a crazy case against Khat GPT, Open AAI. He was never going to win it. It was madness.

[00:00:37]Turns out that was just made up. I mean, the Australian media and probably the international media thought that would be a great headline. A lot of people hated Elon Musk, so that's what they printed. But that wasn't the true story.

[00:00:50]And I thought the true story is a bit more interesting. Hello, my friends.

[00:00:56]Welcome to the channel. I'm Sam Evans.

[00:00:57]Great to have you with us. Now guys, usually when I do a story like this, I get some people in the comments saying, "Just stick to talking about cars and batteries." Um, if you're one of those people, just let me remind you that the problem is not me, the problem is you.

[00:01:11]You don't have to watch. So, Elon Musk has broken his silence regarding the jury decision to throw out the case against Open AI and Sam Elman. Elon Musk has indicated that an appeal will be filed regarding the decision, which went against him yesterday.

[00:01:28]So, what really happened? Well, interesting. A federal jury dismissed this massive lawsuit after less than two hours of deliberation due to one thing, a technicality. They said there was a statute of limitations issue. Very interesting. I'm just wondering if anyone on this jury received any bought any new cars recently.

[00:01:55]In a post on X, Musk addressed what happened. He talked about the federal jury's dismissal of this lawsuit against OpenAI, vowing to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision, according to Musk, was centered not on the substantive claims, but on a statute of limitations technicality.

[00:02:16]Turns out he wasn't lying. This is just the technicality. On the Electric Viking website, I'll put a link in the description below. We have more articles about electric cars and battery technology than any other website that I'm aware of in the world. So check that out. Link is in the description and there you'll find our videos and analysis and articles about everything going on in the EV world. M lawsuit filed in 2024, so it took two years to get to court, accused OpenAI co-founders Sam Elman and Greg Brockman of breaching the organization's original nonprofit mission. Now, I'm curious to know the lawsuit was filed in 2024.

[00:03:00]If it had have been heard, this case had have been heard in 2024, would OpenAI and Sam Elman have gotten off on a technicality?

[00:03:08]I mean, it wasn't Mus fault that he had to wait 2 years for the case to be heard. Open AI was technically established in 2015 as a nonprofit dedicated to developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of all humanity. This is true. Mask was a very big early donor before he departed the company in 2018. There was some disagreement between him and the other founders. Musk alleged that Elman and Brockman improperly shifted the company to toward a for-profit model, enriched themselves to the tune of billions of dollars through massive valuations and partnerships, including with Microsoft, and betrayed its founding agreements.

[00:03:50]In his post, Musk emphasized that the judge and jury never actually looked at the merits of the case at all. Didn't even consider them. They just looked at them on a calendar tech basically dismissed the case on a calendar technicality. He said this, "There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Elman and Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is when they did it. In fact, let's actually look at their full tweet. Regarding the Open IIA case, the judge and jury never actually ruled on the merits of the case, just on a calendar technicality. There is no question to anyone filing the case in detail that Elman and Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is when they did it. I'll be filing an appeal with the North Circuit because creating a precedent to loot charities is incredibly destructive to charitable giving in America. Open AAI was founded to benefit all of humanity. So here's what was actually found. Was Musk did he fail in his court case? Well, technically yes. But was it what people what the media said? No. The jury's unanimous advisory verdict said that Musk's claims of a breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment were filed outside California's three-year statute of limitations. In other words, even if this case had have been heard in 2024, he wouldn't have won anyway. US District Judge Ivonne Gonzalez Rogers adopted the finding and dismissed the case. Open AAI held the outcome as vindication while M legal team, well, they said they're going to appeal. Now, OpenAI saying this was vindication was very disingenuous.

[00:05:32]Kind of makes them look guilty if I'm honest with you. Now, I don't actually think they're guilty. We're going to wait on what happens with the case. I don't know the details, exact details. I need to assess this more. But for OpenAI to celebrate this as a win, vindicating them does make them look like they're kind of dodgy, doesn't it? because that was not what happened. They just got off on a technicality. The judge didn't no one actually assessed this case on its real merits. The trial featured testimony from Musk, from Elman, Brockman, Microsoft CEO Satcha, Nadella, and others, and it exposed some deep riffs in Silicon Valley over AI's direction. Now, I think this trial was a bit of a sham, if I'm honest, because surely they knew.

[00:06:16]The judge and the jury must have known at some point during these hearings that this case was going to be cancelled on a technicality.

[00:06:26]So these lawyers just enriched themselves. This judge enriched themselves just going through this entire process knowing that none of this would have been relevant. Musk has long warned that profit-driven AI development, especially with closed models and powerful corporate ties, risks endangering humanity. That said, Musk does, you know, he's a part owner in the AI chatbot Grock. So, Musk's appeal will obviously prolong the saga, potentially affecting OpenAI's valuation, which is apparently more than 800 billion, and its IPO ambitions.

[00:07:01]Supporters view his stance as defending nonprofit integrity. Critics see it as sour grapes from a competitor whose own XAI is racing into the AI arena. What do you guys think? I'm not really sure what I think of it. Is it sour grapes? Is it legit? Is it fair? Musk has a point. But then there is competition involved here.

[00:07:22]So there has to be some influence from that to some degree. That said, I find this whole getting off in a technicality statute of limitation stuff. I find that kind of nonsensical. I find that kind of almost offensive that that happened because if you killed someone, I mean, would you get off on a technicality? Oh, no, no, no. was 10 years ago. No, you don't, do you? At least not as well. Not as far as I'm aware. Anyway, let me know your thoughts. Thanks for watching.

[00:07:51]Thinking about getting solar, a home battery, or an EV charger? Check out Australia's best free comparison tool because it could save you a lot of money. Guys, click on the link below in the description and you can see how much you can save. Alternatively, give ReSync a call. They are the guys who installed my battery and my home solar. I'll put a link to them as well in the description.

[00:08:14]Need expert advice on what car to buy, what solar system to get, what home battery to get, or potentially for your business? You can get guys a one-on-one consultation directly with me. 60 minutes of tailored guidance. This might help you avoid making a huge mistake spending money when you shouldn't, or potentially save you a massive amount of money. Click the link in the description below because I can assist you. And why not? The link is in the description.