Federal Court Rules Against Elon Musk in His Bitter Feud With Sam Altman
Lawyers for Elon Musk and Sam Altman Make Their Final Case in OpenAI Trial
Sam Altman Defends Himself From Elon Musk’s Accusations in OpenAI Trial
Former OpenAI Exec Calls Decision to Remove Sam Altman a ‘Hail Mary’ During Musk Trial
OpenAI Back in Court Over Canada School Shooter’s Use of ChatGPT
Are Elon Musk and OpenAI Fighting an AI Arms Race? Sam Altman’s Lawyers Think So
Elon Musk Says Sam Altman Tricked Him Into Funding OpenAI
Elon Musk Takes Aim at OpenAI as Trial Begins: ‘It’s Not OK to Steal a Charity’
Player sponsored by
window.__IS_SSR__=true
window.__INITIAL_STATE__={
"attachmentsReducer": {
"audio_0": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_0",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background0.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_1": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_1",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background1.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_2": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_2",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background2.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_3": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_3",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background3.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_4": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_4",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background4.jpg"
}
}
},
"placeholder": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "placeholder",
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"height": 533,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"medium_large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-768x512.jpg",
"width": 768,
"height": 512,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"height": 533,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"small": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1280,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 32,
"height": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 50,
"height": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 64,
"height": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 96,
"height": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 128,
"height": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
}
},
"news_12085240": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12085240",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12085240",
"found": true
},
"title": "Musk Altman_webimg",
"publishDate": 1779835829,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12085236,
"modified": 1779835862,
"caption": "Once co-founders, now courtroom adversaries: sketches of Sam Altman and Elon Musk from the Musk v. Altman trial in Oakland, Calif.",
"credit": "Vicki Behringer for KQED",
"altTag": "A broken heart-shaped locket split down the middle, set against a red background scattered with rose petals. The left half of the locket contains a courtroom sketch of Sam Altman seated at a witness stand. The right half contains a courtroom sketch of Elon Musk seated at a witness stand. The text \"Close All Tabs\" appears in the upper right corner.",
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Musk-Altman_webimg-160x90.png",
"width": 160,
"height": 90,
"mimeType": "image/png"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Musk-Altman_webimg-1536x864.png",
"width": 1536,
"height": 864,
"mimeType": "image/png"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Musk-Altman_webimg-672x372.png",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/png"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Musk-Altman_webimg-1038x576.png",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/png"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Musk-Altman_webimg-1200x675.png",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/png"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Musk-Altman_webimg-600x600.png",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/png"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Musk-Altman_webimg.png",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1080
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12084126": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12084126",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12084126",
"found": true
},
"title": "260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-06-KQED",
"publishDate": 1779135074,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1779136158,
"caption": "The verdict is read in the trial in which Elon Musk claimed that Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity rather than solely for profit in Oakland on May 18, 2026.",
"credit": "Vicki Behringer for KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-06-KQED-160x90.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 90,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-06-KQED-1536x864.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 864,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-06-KQED-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-06-KQED-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-06-KQED-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-06-KQED-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-06-KQED.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1125
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12083803": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12083803",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12083803",
"found": true
},
"title": "Elon Musk v. OpenAI Trial Continues In California",
"publishDate": 1778804683,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12083612,
"modified": 1778805456,
"caption": "OpenAI's attorney William Savitt makes remarks during a press conference outside the courthouse at the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building on May 6, 2026, in Oakland, California. Elon Musk invested in OpenAI early on, believing it would be a non-profit, but is now suing OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman, for allegedly deceiving him by developing OpenAI into a for-profit company. ",
"credit": "Benjamin Fanjoy/Getty Images",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12083392": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12083392",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12083392",
"found": true
},
"title": "260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED",
"publishDate": 1778625867,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1778625974,
"caption": "Open AI CEO Sam Altman testifies as a video of him is played on a screen in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity rather than solely for profit in Oakland on May 12, 2026.",
"credit": "Vicki Behringer for KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED-160x90.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 90,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED-1536x864.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 864,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1125
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12083235": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12083235",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12083235",
"found": true
},
"title": "Elon Musk v. OpenAI Trial Continues In California",
"publishDate": 1778545779,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12083224,
"modified": 1778546322,
"caption": "OpenAI CEO Sam Altman arrives at the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building on April 30, 2026, in Oakland, California. Elon Musk invested in OpenAI early on, believing it would be a nonprofit, but is now suing OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman, for allegedly deceiving him by developing OpenAI into a for-profit company. ",
"credit": "Benjamin Fanjoy/Getty Images",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12082068": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12082068",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12082068",
"found": true
},
"title": "CANADA-SHOOTING-CRIME",
"publishDate": 1777656025,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12082064,
"modified": 1777677641,
"caption": "A young boy brings flowers to a memorial in honor of the victims of one of Canada's deadliest shootings in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, Canada, on Feb. 13, 2026. An 18-year-old carried out a mass shooting in a remote mining town, killing six people at a local school, after slaying her mother and stepbrother. Canadian Police Commander Dwayne McDonald said authorities still don't know the motive in the Feb. 10 mass shooting, but the shooter, who took her own life, was known to have mental health issues. ",
"credit": "Paige Taylor White/AFP via Getty Images",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty-160x110.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 110,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty-1536x1053.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1053,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1371
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12081606": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12081606",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12081606",
"found": true
},
"title": "Musk OpenAI Trial",
"publishDate": 1777397997,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12081603,
"modified": 1777398261,
"caption": "Elon Musk arrives at the U.S. District Court in Oakland, California, on Tuesday, April 28, 2026. ",
"credit": "Godofredo A. Vásquez/AP Photo",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-2048x1365.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1365,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-2000x1333.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-scaled-e1777398211110.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1334
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12081681": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12081681",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12081681",
"found": true
},
"title": "260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1",
"publishDate": 1777416108,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12081603,
"modified": 1777508469,
"caption": "Representing Microsoft, Russell Coan (left) speaks as Elon Musk watches in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026.",
"credit": "Vicki Behringer for KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-160x90.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 90,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-1536x864.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 864,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1125
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12081639": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12081639",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12081639",
"found": true
},
"title": "260428-MUSK ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED",
"publishDate": 1777410140,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12081603,
"modified": 1777422271,
"caption": "Elon Musk (left) takes the stand in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026.",
"credit": "Vicki Behringer for KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED-160x90.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 90,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED-1536x864.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 864,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1125
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
}
},
"audioPlayerReducer": {
"postId": "stream_live",
"isPaused": true,
"isPlaying": false,
"pfsActive": false,
"pledgeModalIsOpen": true,
"playerDrawerIsOpen": false
},
"authorsReducer": {
"byline_news_12082064": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_12082064",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_12082064",
"name": "Matt O’Brien, Associated Press, and Nisa Khan, KQED",
"isLoading": false
},
"rachael-myrow": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "251",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "251",
"found": true
},
"name": "Rachael Myrow",
"firstName": "Rachael",
"lastName": "Myrow",
"slug": "rachael-myrow",
"email": "rmyrow@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": true,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Senior Editor of KQED's Silicon Valley News Desk",
"bio": "• I write and edit stories about how Silicon Valley power and policies shape everyday life in California. I’m also passionate about making Bay Area history and culture more accessible to a broad public. • I’ve been a journalist for most of my life, starting in high school with The Franklin Press in Los Angeles, where I grew up. While earning my first degree in English at UC Berkeley, I got my start in public radio at KALX-FM. After completing a second degree in journalism at Cal, I landed my first professional job at Marketplace, then moved on to KPCC (now LAist), and then KQED, where I hosted The California Report for more than seven years. • My reporting has appeared on NPR, The World, WBUR’s \u003ci>Here & Now\u003c/i>, and the BBC. I also guest host for KQED’s \u003ci>Forum\u003c/i>, as well as the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco. • I speak periodically on media, democracy and technology issues, and do voiceover work for documentaries and educational video projects. • Outside of the studio, you'll find me hiking Bay Area trails and whipping up Insta-ready meals in my kitchen. • I do not accept gifts, money, or favors from anyone connected to my reporting, I don't pay people for information, and I do not support or donate to political causes. • I strive to treat the people I report on with fairness, honesty, and respect. I also recognize there are often multiple sides to a story and work to verify information through multiple sources and documentation. If I get something wrong, I correct it.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/87bf8cb5874e045cdff430523a6d48b1?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "rachaelmyrow",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": "https://www.linkedin.com/in/rachaelmyrow/",
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"edit_others_posts",
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "futureofyou",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "bayareabites",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "food",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Rachael Myrow | KQED",
"description": "Senior Editor of KQED's Silicon Valley News Desk",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/87bf8cb5874e045cdff430523a6d48b1?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/87bf8cb5874e045cdff430523a6d48b1?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/rachael-myrow"
},
"chambrick": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11832",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11832",
"found": true
},
"name": "Chris Hambrick",
"firstName": "Chris",
"lastName": "Hambrick",
"slug": "chambrick",
"email": "chambrick@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": null,
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c4a3663ebbd3a21fa35ef06a1236ce8a?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "podcasts",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Chris Hambrick | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c4a3663ebbd3a21fa35ef06a1236ce8a?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c4a3663ebbd3a21fa35ef06a1236ce8a?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/chambrick"
},
"cegusa": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11869",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11869",
"found": true
},
"name": "Chris Egusa",
"firstName": "Chris",
"lastName": "Egusa",
"slug": "cegusa",
"email": "cegusa@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": null,
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/86d00b34cb7eeb5247e991f0e20c70c4?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Chris Egusa | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/86d00b34cb7eeb5247e991f0e20c70c4?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/86d00b34cb7eeb5247e991f0e20c70c4?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/cegusa"
},
"kdebenedetti": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11913",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11913",
"found": true
},
"name": "Katie DeBenedetti",
"firstName": "Katie",
"lastName": "DeBenedetti",
"slug": "kdebenedetti",
"email": "kdebenedetti@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news",
"science"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Katie DeBenedetti is a digital reporter covering daily news for the Express Desk. Prior to joining KQED as a culture reporting intern in January 2024, she covered education and city government for the Napa Valley Register.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/6e31073cb8f7e4214ab03f42771d0f45?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Katie DeBenedetti | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/6e31073cb8f7e4214ab03f42771d0f45?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/6e31073cb8f7e4214ab03f42771d0f45?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/kdebenedetti"
},
"mcueva": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11943",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11943",
"found": true
},
"name": "Maya Cueva",
"firstName": "Maya",
"lastName": "Cueva",
"slug": "mcueva",
"email": "mcueva@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": null,
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/26d0967153608e4720f52779f754087a?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Maya Cueva | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/26d0967153608e4720f52779f754087a?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/26d0967153608e4720f52779f754087a?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/mcueva"
},
"msung": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11944",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11944",
"found": true
},
"name": "Morgan Sung",
"firstName": "Morgan",
"lastName": "Sung",
"slug": "msung",
"email": "msung@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "Close All Tabs Host",
"bio": null,
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/34033b8d232ee6c987ca6f0a1a28f0e5?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Morgan Sung | KQED",
"description": "Close All Tabs Host",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/34033b8d232ee6c987ca6f0a1a28f0e5?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/34033b8d232ee6c987ca6f0a1a28f0e5?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/msung"
}
},
"breakingNewsReducer": {},
"pagesReducer": {},
"postsReducer": {
"stream_live": {
"type": "live",
"id": "stream_live",
"audioUrl": "https://streams.kqed.org/kqedradio",
"title": "Live Stream",
"excerpt": "Live Stream information currently unavailable.",
"link": "/radio",
"featImg": "",
"label": {
"name": "KQED Live",
"link": "/"
}
},
"stream_kqedNewscast": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "stream_kqedNewscast",
"audioUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/.stream/anon/radio/RDnews/newscast.mp3?_=1",
"title": "KQED Newscast",
"featImg": "",
"label": {
"name": "88.5 FM",
"link": "/"
}
},
"news_12085236": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12085236",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12085236",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1779876013000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "musk-v-altman-was-peak-silicon-valley-theatrics",
"title": "Musk v. Altman Was Peak Silicon Valley Theatrics",
"publishDate": 1779876013,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Musk v. Altman Was Peak Silicon Valley Theatrics | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"#episode-transcript\">\u003ci>View the full episode transcript.\u003c/i>\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">For three weeks, all eyes were on a salacious courtroom drama unfolding in Oakland, California. The Musk v. Altman trial had everything you’d expect from a favorite soap opera: Backstabbing? Check! Secret diary entries? Check! Pleading text messages? Check! And two billionaire buddies turned rivals duking it out over who did or did not steal a charity. Morgan and KQED’s Rachael Myrow explore the trial highlights, outcome and the big question: what was it all for?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c!-- iframe plugin v.4.3 wordpress.org/plugins/iframe/ -->\u003cbr>\n\u003ciframe loading=\"lazy\" frameborder=\"0\" height=\"200\" scrolling=\"no\" src=\"https://playlist.megaphone.fm?e=KQINC1712425236\" width=\"100%\" class=\"iframe-class\">\u003c/iframe>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guest:\u003c/strong>\u003c/p>\n\u003cul>\n\u003cli>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/author/rachael-myrow\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Rachael Myrow\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">, senior editor, Silicon Valley News Desk at KQED\u003c/span>\u003c/li>\n\u003c/ul>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Further Reading/Listening:\u003c/b>\u003c/p>\n\u003cul>\n\u003cli>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12084062/federal-court-rules-against-elon-musk-in-his-bitter-feud-with-sam-altman\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Federal Court Rules Against Elon Musk in His Bitter Feud With Sam Altman\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> — Katie DeBenedetti and Rachael Myrow, \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">KQED\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>\u003ci>\u003c/i>\u003ca href=\"https://www.wired.com/story/fancy-butt-pillows-musk-v-altman-trial/\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Everyone at the Musk v. Altman Trial Is Using Fancy Butt Cushions\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> — Paresh Dave, \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">WIRED\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>\u003ci>\u003c/i>\u003ca href=\"https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/932464/musk-v-altman-proved-that-ai-is-led-by-the-wrong-people\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Musk v. Altman proved that AI is led by the wrong people\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> — Hayden Field, \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">The Verge\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>\u003ci>\u003c/i>\u003ca href=\"https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/13/sam-altman-may-control-our-future-can-he-be-trusted\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Sam Altman May Control Our Future—Can He Be Trusted?\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> — Ronan Farrow and Andrew Marantz, \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">The New Yorker\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>\u003ci>\u003c/i>\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/2026/05/20/nx-s1-5822419/ai-colleges-commencement-booing\">Advice for 2026 commencement speakers: Don’t bring up AI\u003c/a> — Jude Joffe-Block and Michelle Aslam, \u003ci>NPR\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003c/ul>\n\u003cp>Want to give us feedback on the show? Shoot us an email at \u003ca href=\"mailto:CloseAllTabs@KQED.org\">CloseAllTabs@KQED.org\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Follow us on\u003c/span>\u003ca href=\"https://www.instagram.com/closealltabspod/\"> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Instagram\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> and\u003c/span>\u003ca href=\"https://www.tiktok.com/@closealltabs\"> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">TikTok\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2 id=\"episode-transcript\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This is a computer-generated transcript. While our team has reviewed it, there may be errors.\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung, Host: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Hello Tabbers! Tabbies? Tabhive? We’re workshopping this. Ok? \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Anyway, if you’re in the Close All Tabs fandom, and you want more of these deep dives, then please rate and review the show on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you’re listening to this! Post about it! Follow us on Instagram! Tag us! Basically, it would be a huge help to get the word out. Ok, let’s get to the show.\u003c/span>\u003cb>\u003cbr>\n\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">The tech world has been buzzing over one of the juiciest legal showdowns in Silicon Valley: Musk v. Altman. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Basically, Elon Musk, of Tesla and Twitter infamy, accused OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, and its leadership of betraying the company’s nonprofit roots. He alleged that instead of sticking to the original mission, which was to build safe artificial general intelligence for the benefit of all of humanity, the company chased profits over AI safety. He says they “stole a charity.” \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">On the other side: Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI who co-founded the company with Musk. Once upon a time, they were actually buddies. But today? They’re bitter rivals. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">For three weeks, tech billionaires, their legal counsel, their personal security guards, and a throng of journalists packed into a courtroom in Oakland, California. This was a real “who’s who” of the AI industry. The six billionaires who took the stand have a collective net worth of around $850 billion dollars. That’s more than the GDP of most countries. And what did the uber wealthy bring for a long day at court? The hottest accessory in downtown Oakland: Fancy butt cushions. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Record scratch]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow, Guest:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> You know, I have to admit, I was not looking, uh, anywhere in the vicinity of their butts, so I did not see these butt cushions, uh, that I read about in Wired. But, um, I, I did see some more, you know, sober, uh, sensible butt cushions that the lawyers were using.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This is Rachael Myrow, she’s the Silicon Valley tech editor at KQED, and she covered the case, trekking out for the grueling 12 days of trial. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> And I really should have come up with one of my own because we were in that court, courtroom from 8am in the morning to 2 in the afternoon most days.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This trial was one of the courtroom dramas of the decade. Rachael said it was like \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Silicon Valley\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">, the HBO show, meets a telenovela. Before it even started, Musk got so catty online that the judge threatened him with a gag order.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">He went on X on the eve of the trial, popping off about Scam Altman until Judge Gonzalez Rogers dressed him down in front of the court.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">That’s just the start of this gossip feast. We’re talking backstabbing! Personal diary entries read aloud! Secret affairs! Over 20 witnesses airing out everyone’s dirty laundry. And after all of that, the jury sided with OpenAI. So does this count as a crushing blow to Elon Musk?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Musk operates like President Trump. He sues for all sorts of reasons, and he also counts a win differently than normal people would count a win.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And he doesn’t need to win in the courtroom to win in other ways. Because nobody walked out of this trial looking great, especially not Sam Altman.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The historical record now shows a group of extraordinarily entitled people, mostly men, scrambling to be the tip of the spear for the AI revolution. Uh, I think the benefit of humanity never had anything to do with it.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">At the end of the day, nobody really won here. We’re going to get into that and open a few tabs about the trial, the drama leading up to it, the great billionaire AI industry reckoning and what this really means for the rest of us plebeians. Ready?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This is Close All Tabs. I’m Morgan Sung, tech journalist and your chronically online friend, here to open as many browser tabs as it takes to help you understand how the digital world affects our real lives. Let’s get into it. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Ok, let’s open our first tab: Sam Altman, Elon Musk relationship timeline \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">K-dramas, telenovelas, any CW show, pick your poison. At its core, this scenario is a soap opera classic. Two besties have a falling out, struggle for power, and forgetting what they once meant to each other become embroiled in a years-long feud, hell bent on taking the other down. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> I don’t know if they ever were friends. But also I wouldn’t say that they were frenemies, and again, this is just from my experience of the trial, \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Ok, maybe that was a little bit of fanfiction. But we can’t write off their tech bromance entirely. After all, during the trial, Altman testified under oath that Musk used to show him memes on his phone. That’s pretty intimate, if you ask me. And years before that, they were two very rich guys who shared a dream.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Elon Musk in particular, uh, was very worried about the thought that artificial general intelligence, which is to say AI that surpasses human intelligence, uh, could, uh, come to the hands of one powerful player first, and then they would have, I don’t know, world domination within their grasp. So he got together with Sam Altman of Y Combinator fame or infamy, however you see it, \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Y Combinator is the startup accelerator that launched Reddit, Airbnb, DoorDash, Dropbox, Stripe, Coinbase, the list goes on. Sam Altman was part of the inaugural cohort. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And the two of them cooked up this nonprofit with a charitable mission. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">They launched OpenAI in 2015, as a nonprofit artificial intelligence research company. In the first blog post, the company wrote: “Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">But it doesn’t take long before they realize that if this is gonna be a thing, if this is gonna compete with Google, and whoever else might come along they were gonna need way more money than they were pulling in at the time.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So Elon Musk was spending millions, but they were probably gonna need billions. They started talking about setting up a for-profit division. And it wasn’t long before they realized in this conversation, collectively, that Elon wanted to be in charge of it, in control of it. And you can tell this because, you know, mounds of discovery, personal texts and email chains and personal journal entries made it abundantly clear that Musk was thinking close to the beginning like, ‘I know what I’ll do. We’ll fold this new this for-profit version of OpenAI into Tesla, where I can work on AGI in secret.’\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Well, Sam Altman and the other OpenAI principal co-founders weren’t down for that. Musk walked away in 2018. OpenAI launched ChatGPT in 2022. A year later, Musk announced his own AI startup, xAI, which eventually launched Grok. Musk has boasted about how Grok is not trained to be “woke”, unlike competitors like ChatGPT. OpenAI, meanwhile, has become the belle of the Silicon Valley ball, nabbing billions of dollars of investment from Microsoft. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And at a certain point, it becomes clear that the OpenAI nonprofit is really a shell of its former self. Right? Like, it’s all of the IP, all of the intellectual property has shifted, uh, from the nonprofit to the for-profit, all of the talent…I think it was kind of sitting there employee-free until very recently, and money was put into it. It’s now estimated to be worth about 200 billion, with a B, dollars. But what has this nonprofit been up to? Precious little. Precious little. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And so at some point, Musk decides to sue and to say, ‘Wait a second, you know, um, this is a bait and switch…they’ve abandoned the mission that we cooked up originally and, I want recompense. I want Altman and others, stripped from the board, stripped from their leadership positions. I want, something like $150 billion shifted from the for-profit to the nonprofit.’ But of course, if you’re OpenAI, your attitude is like, ‘Whoa, this is clearly vindictive.’ You know, you didn’t get what you want, that’s why you walked away with your toys and your money, and, uh, you know, we’re gonna see you in court.’\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> This legal showdown has been simmering for years. Between filing in early 2024 and finally walking into the courtroom for his testimony last month, Musk has: filed a motion accusing OpenAI and Microsoft of being a monopoly, led a group of investors in an attempt to buy OpenAI, threatened to sue Apple for giving OpenAI preferential treatment in the App Store, and has gotten into multiple online spats with Altman. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> It was 100% clear there’s no love lost, uh, between you know, the principals. You know, what I like to say is, like, nobody has clean hands in this situation.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> So what exactly happened at this trial? Let’s open another new tab: Musk v. Altman \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> On one side you’ve got Elon Musk. You know, he didn’t come to be the wealthiest person on Earth by accident, right? Uh, even if he may not have been the person to start many of the companies he now owns and controls, uh, he took them into the stratosphere, quite literally in the case of SpaceX.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">He’s very good at doing that, but he’s also well known to be mercurial, to have a kind of Jekyll and Hyde personality, to push other people to the breaking point.\u003c/span> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And, um, he’s gonna make decisions that, uh, he doesn’t expect to be countermanded on in the slightest. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Then you have somebody like Sam Altman, and, uh, I’ll tell you, it wasn’t any accident that The New Yorker came out with a scandalous profile of Sam Altman on the eve of the trial that basically, uh, described him as a compulsive pathological liar, and all of that came out in the trial too. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Let’s go through a few highlights from this trial. It got pretty juicy when Shivon Zillis took the stand. She’s a venture capitalist and machine learning expert who started working at OpenAI when it launched, and later joined the board of directors. She’s also the mother of four of Musk’s fourteen children. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">In her testimony, she said that their relationship started with a “one-off” at a corporate off-site. When she decided to start a family on her own, Musk offered to be her platonic sperm donor. Their relationship grew, and now, they’re romantic partners. She told the OpenAI board about her relationship with Musk only after Business Insider started reporting on it. According to other testimony, many board members wanted to remove her, but decided to let her stay to, “keep the Elon conflict under control.” \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> I think for many people who are not familiar with Silicon Valley shenanigans, going back decades, not, this is not new to AI, um, it’s not just neutral characters on the board. It’s a very insular world. It’s on the level of incest, I would say. And so I, for one, was not shocked to discover that Elon Musk had a, again, like a consigliere on the board making decisions. She seemed to be there in many ways, um, serving as a go-between, between Sam and Elon, helping to smooth over conversations, helping to, to help them reach points of agreement when that was possible, and at the very least, have clarity on what the other side was thinking when that was not. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Something else that also g- kind of struck me about not just Zelis’s testimony, but also the other women who had roles in this period of time at OpenAI that was under discussion, is how much even the smartest women were only number twos, number threes, ancillary characters in a drama that starred men. This is all about men, primarily white men, with a tremendous sense of entitlement.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And then there are these salacious journal entries. So, Greg Brockman is the president of OpenAI, and today, he has a 30 billion dollar stake in the company. But he wasn’t always so ludicrously wealthy. During the trial, pages of his personal diary from nearly 10 years ago were read out loud. And what he wrote seems to bolster Musk’s argument that they were all in it for the money, not necessarily for the good of humanity. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Word to the wise, be aware that if you get sued, they’re gonna come looking for this stuff. You know? Like, when he’s, when he’s writing to himself, “What will take me to $1 billion?” it was pretty clear that it sounded like he was interested in becoming rich. You have a guy who was personally ambitious. Um, is that illegal? I don’t know if it’s illegal. It certainly didn’t look good. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The funny thing here about Zelis, and it’s kind of in parallel to, to Brockman, is that, you know, Zelis was taking notes. And also a lot of Zelis’ emails and texts document how early Musk knew that people were talking about a, uh, a for-profit, that Musk himself was talking about a for-profit form of OpenAI. So this kind of ate away at the argument that he was shocked, shocked to discover that self-enrichment had become such a powerful motivator for his colleagues.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Another standout from the trial: texts between Sam Altman and former OpenAI CTO Mira Murati from the night that the OpenAI board voted to fire Altman as CEO. He was reinstated after over 90% of OpenAI employees threatened to quit and work for Microsoft. That in between time period is known as “The Blip.” And the exchanges from the night it started were read in court, and have since gone viral — immediately embedded in the lexicon of internet reaction memes.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Rachael and I are going to do a dramatic reading of the texts \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> I think I wanna be Mira. Or wait a moment. No, I wanna be Sam. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> You wanna be Sam? Okay. Okay.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Can you indicate directionally good or bad? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Directionally very bad. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Can I come in? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">They don’t want you to.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">What do you want to make it better? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">I’m still willing to just walk away if that helps. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">If they are ramped up for crazy lawsuits against me, then I’m not sure what… \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Can you please tell them I just wanna resolve this however, \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">and would like to join?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">They’re convinced about their decision.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> For me to be fired or some new thing? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Yes, for you to be gone. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Okay. Then can I come in and talk about a path forward with them? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Can you ask why they’ve been saying all weekend they wanted me back?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Still don’t want me? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">They don’t want you\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> I mean, these read, these read like the kinds of texts that you would send during a really brutal breakup, like when you’re like, ‘Oh, my friend sees my ex in, in public. Can you please go talk to them?’ You know? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Yeah.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">What do they reveal about the power struggle at OpenAI though?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> There was an attempted coup, essentially, precisely because of Sam Altman’s, uh, alleged managerial misbehavior, pitting different people against each other with different stories.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Another OpenAI board member, Helen Toner, shed light on this in her deposition. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Helen Toner basically said that Altman lied about what kind of safety reviews were done about, uh, models of ChatGPT that were released, that he ultimately cleared for release, and which, you know, she could say really wasn’t about AI safety, It was about this, you know, lack of trust in the communication. Microsoft, uh, CEO Satya Nadella, at one point he characterized the entire blip as amateur hour. Uh, these naive board members thinking that they could, you know, hold Sam Altman accountable, uh, for, for lying to them. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Right. I mean, Brockman and Altman were both throwing around some pretty wild accusations about why Musk really wanted control of OpenAI. Um, Brockman said that he wanted to raise massive amounts of money to build a colony on Mars. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Um, Sam Altman claimed that Musk was planning to pass OpenAI down to his children when he died, like succession style. But I mean, everyone’s dirty laundry was aired out in that courtroom. Like, no one came out with clean hands, including Sam Altman. So what did the witnesses say about him and his character? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Oh my goodness. There were so many people who described him as a liar to the extent that when finally he was directly questioned about being a liar, uh, and he didn’t answer the question directly, it just made him look more like a liar. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">There were so many people who talked about his lack of, uh, trustworthiness. Sam Altman on the witness stand for hours being asked why he’s such a big liar. His former chief scientist, his former chief technology officer, two former board members, all testifying under oath that Altman exhibited a consistent pattern of dishonesty.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">That is now in the public record forever.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">all of these guys come off as self-serving and, and, uh, backstabbing and oily. I wouldn’t wanna meet any of them in a dark alley or on the other side of a business deal. You know, like, they’re obviously not out for the benefit of humanity. But then we knew that. Didn’t we know that? I think we knew that. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">After all that, mountains of evidence, hours of testimony, brutal days spent on those cold, hard, unforgiving courtroom benches, unless you had a fancy butt cushion, the ending of this trial was kind of anticlimactic. It took the jury just two hours to come to a unanimous decision. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The jury decided that Musk simply waited too long to sue. California has statutes of limitations. So you can’t just sit on your claims forever.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So, in the end nothing happened! But that doesn’t mean the trial was for nothing. What’s the real outcome here? What did this courtroom drama really reveal? After the break, a new tab. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">But first, we wanted to remind you that Close All Tabs depends on listeners like you to keep us going. You can support us by becoming a member at donate.kqed.org/podcasts. Ok, after the break? We’re leaving the courtroom, and going back to the real world. Stick around.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> We’re back! Let’s open one last tab: Musk v. Altman outcome.\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So the jury rejected Musk’s case this week. But it’s important to note that they didn’t make that decision based on the legal merit of his case, just that it was too late for Musk to pursue it. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And the jury found that Musk knew or should have known what was happening at OpenAI by 2020 at the latest. He filed in 2024. He argued in court, you know, that that’s because it wasn’t that he was opposed to any kind of for-profit division. He just didn’t want one that dominated the nonprofit. And that didn’t become clear to him until 2023. So he wanted to essentially start the clock on the statue of limitations later on in the game\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">But OpenAI argued and the judge essentially agreed that Musk needed to have made the case soon after what he saw happening at OpenAI by 2020 at the latest. So all three claims, breach of charitable trust, unjust enrichment, Microsoft aiding and abetting, are gone because of the statute of limitations thing, not because they decided on the merits.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Hours after the verdict came out, Elon Musk responded in the most Elon Musk possible way, which is he took it to Twitter, uh, sorry, X, to complain. Um, he did a classic tweet and delete. So the first tweet he said, first post, “This illustrates why the ruling by the terrible activist Oakland judge, who simply used the jury as a fig leaf, creates such a terrible precedent. She just handed a free license to loot charities if you can keep the looting quiet for a few years.” And then deleted that. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Then followed up, “Regarding the OpenAI 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 following the case in detail that Altman and Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is when they did it.” \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Did this response surprise you at all?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Not in the slightest. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So now that she makes clear she agrees with the jury, Musk posted ‘she’s a terrible activist Oakland judge who handed out a free license to loot charities.’ Musk is just not sympathetic. Um, but I’m thinking, like President Trump, it wasn’t necessarily important to Musk to win the case, just to file it, to drag Altman through the mud in a very public way ahead of these two IPOs. If what you what is revenge, that’s not nothing.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This trial did a number on Sam Altman’s public image. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> It certainly revealed a lot of the circular business deals he was involved in. He may have recused himself from the actual votes with some of these companies but he nonetheless profited from them or could profit in the near future. I think this was a habit he picked up at Y Combinator. Anyway, it was laid bare in the courtroom. I think it put another nail in the coffin. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Like, there were protesters outside the courthouse with some very funny signs up. And they poked the most fun at Musk, but they also poked a lot of fun at Sam Altman. You know, it’s Sam Altman’s house that got a Molotov cocktail thrown at it.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">You know, like, I think there is a great deal of public discontent, even rage over the rollout of AI into all of our lives. And, you know, this train got rolling out of the station through OpenAI, through ChatGPT, uh, and, you know, it was off to the races for a bunch of companies. But there at the forefront, at least in the beginning, was OpenAI, and Sam Altman is the face of OpenAI. And so this trial and all the mountains of evidence just confirm for people their opinions of Sam Altman.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">You know, if there’s a fan club somebody’s gotta send me a T-shirt to prove it.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> A lot of Silicon Valley tends to operate in a kind of bubble, disconnected from the public’s growing discontent around AI. Students are graduating into increasingly unstable careers, thanks to companies pushing to replace human workers with AI, regardless of whether AI can do the jobs better. Nothing shows that disconnect quite like the reaction to commencement speakers who tried to praise AI to a room full of new graduates. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Audio clip from University of Central Florida Graduation] \u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Speaker: The rise of artificial intelligence is the next industrial revolution.\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Crowd: Boos \u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Speaker: Woo! What happened? Ok, I struck a chord! \u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Multiple commencement speakers across the country have tried to proselytize AI this month and they were booed each time. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This rejection is not unfounded. While covering the trial, Rachael spoke to one of the protesters outside of the courthouse. Her name is Valerie. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Valerie Sizemore:\u003c/b> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">I used to be a software engineer, but, um, have been unemployed by AI, so now I’m trying to make the resistance happen.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So this trial, um, these two CEOs are fighting over a piece of a pie that, uh, doesn’t really matter for the world. They’re just trying to make themselves richer, but we’re all gonna lose regardless of who wins.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The AI titans, and they are titans now, keep mistaking public resistance for ignorance. Somebody like Valerie isn’t failing to understand the wonders of AI. She’s recognizing that the costs like higher power bills, strained electrical grids, her job disappearing on, her career disappearing on her. Right? A technology class that treats the question of public consent as an annoying inconvenience. I guess what I’m getting at here, Morgan, is that we’re not talking about a PR problem. We’re talking about class warfare.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This was a battle between two billionaires. The trial revolved around this core question: Is OpenAI’s commitment to the benefit of humanity real? Or, is the company’s commitment really to chasing profits at the expense of AI safety? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">What was supposed to be the trial of the century ended without answers or accountability. And by ruling on timing instead of the actual merits of the case, the trial also failed to establish any legal precedent for AI governance and guardrails. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> It’s not gonna do a damn thing to stop this nightmare. Right? Obviously there’s gonna be an appeal from Musk’s attorneys. Who knows what’ll happen there? But you know, both Musk with his SpaceX IPO and Altman with his OpenAI IPO, they’re just gonna go forward as before. The AI rollout will go on as before.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Who knows if we’ll ever get artificial general intelligence per se? I don’t think it matters. I mean, the changes that have been happening have been happening without artificial general intelligence. They’re, they’re disruptive enough. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> How do you think this case will impact future AI cases?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> OpenAI is a strange creature. It started as a nonprofit, maybe because Musk and Altman intuitively knew that, uh, they had a better chance of raising money at that time if they presented it as for the good of humanity as opposed to, you know, just a chance to get in on this gold rush.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Right? And, and it must be said, and you know, many of the OpenAI principals said it many times that in the beginning, in the first few years of OpenAI, it was not clear at all it was gonna succeed, right? Google seemed to have such a head start and such a well-capitalized head start. So, you know, OpenAI has only become fabulously valued, um, in recent years, and it, it’s still not making money.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">To go back to, you know, like what, what precedent does this set for Silicon Valley? I don’t know that it sets any precedent because who in their right mind would start something like OpenAI again in that way? You would set up a startup like any other group of entrepreneurs and take your chances with that setup.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">All of this theater ended with no real answers, no real accountability, and no real change for the AI industry overall. So then was the point of taking this case to court in the first place? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The judge put tight, and I mean tight brackets around what this case was going to be about at trial, which raises the question for me, why did she take this case in the first place?Why did she give Elon Musk standing if he had unclean hands? He was a rival. He was a competitor in the AI space. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">I think that Gonzalez Rogers wanted these guys on both sides to be forced to peel back the curtain on how AI came to dominate the world in the way that it does now. And maybe the judge couldn’t give us accountability, but she could give us visibility, and that’s not nothing.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And another upside: all those juicy, salacious details that were once just gossip fodder, that’s public record now. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Is there any legal precedent here? I think maybe the point was the theater.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">That’s it for this episode, but stick around after the credits. Ok, let’s close all these tabs. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Close All Tabs is a production of KQED Studios, and is reported and hosted by me, Morgan Sung. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This episode was produced by Chris Egusa and edited by Chris Hambrick. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">The Close All Tabs team also includes producer Maya Cueva and audio engineer Brendan Willard. Additional music by APM.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Audience engagement support from Maha Sanad. Jen Chien is our Director of Podcasts, and Ethan Toven-Lindsey is our Editor in Chief.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists. San Francisco Northern California Local.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This episode’s keyboard sounds were submitted by my dad, Casey Sung, and recorded on his white and blue Epomaker Aula F99 keyboard with Graywood v3 switches and Cherry profile PBT keycaps.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Thanks for listening! \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Rachael Myrow: Steve Molo, uh, the Musk’s attorney: “Have you misled people with whom you do business?” \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Altman “I do not think so.” \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And then Molo says, “Would they think so?”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And then Altman says, “I can’t answer that.”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Molo says, “You’ve repeatedly been called a liar by people with whom you’ve done business.”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Altman: “I have heard people say that.” \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Molo: “Are you completely trustworthy?”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Altman: “I believe so.”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Molo: “You don’t know?”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Altman: “I’ll just amend my answer to yes.”\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "KQED’s Rachael Myrow explains the courtroom theatrics of the Musk v. Altman trial.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1780033179,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": true,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 139,
"wordCount": 5711
},
"headData": {
"title": "Musk v. Altman Was Peak Silicon Valley Theatrics | KQED",
"description": "For three weeks, all eyes were on a salacious courtroom drama unfolding in Oakland, California. The Musk v. Altman trial had everything you’d expect from a favorite soap opera: Backstabbing? Check! Secret diary entries? Check! Pleading text messages? Check! And two billionaire buddies turned rivals duking it out over who did or did not steal a charity. Morgan and KQED’s Rachel Myrow explore the trial highlights, outcome and the big question: what was it all for?",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"socialDescription": "For three weeks, all eyes were on a salacious courtroom drama unfolding in Oakland, California. The Musk v. Altman trial had everything you’d expect from a favorite soap opera: Backstabbing? Check! Secret diary entries? Check! Pleading text messages? Check! And two billionaire buddies turned rivals duking it out over who did or did not steal a charity. Morgan and KQED’s Rachel Myrow explore the trial highlights, outcome and the big question: what was it all for?",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Musk v. Altman Was Peak Silicon Valley Theatrics",
"datePublished": "2026-05-27T03:00:13-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-05-28T22:39:39-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 33520,
"slug": "podcast",
"name": "Podcast"
},
"source": "Close All Tabs",
"sourceUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/podcasts/closealltabs",
"audioUrl": "https://traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC1712425236.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12085236",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12085236/musk-v-altman-was-peak-silicon-valley-theatrics",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"#episode-transcript\">\u003ci>View the full episode transcript.\u003c/i>\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">For three weeks, all eyes were on a salacious courtroom drama unfolding in Oakland, California. The Musk v. Altman trial had everything you’d expect from a favorite soap opera: Backstabbing? Check! Secret diary entries? Check! Pleading text messages? Check! And two billionaire buddies turned rivals duking it out over who did or did not steal a charity. Morgan and KQED’s Rachael Myrow explore the trial highlights, outcome and the big question: what was it all for?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c!-- iframe plugin v.4.3 wordpress.org/plugins/iframe/ -->\u003cbr>\n\u003ciframe loading=\"lazy\" frameborder=\"0\" height=\"200\" scrolling=\"no\" src=\"https://playlist.megaphone.fm?e=KQINC1712425236\" width=\"100%\" class=\"iframe-class\">\u003c/iframe>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guest:\u003c/strong>\u003c/p>\n\u003cul>\n\u003cli>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/author/rachael-myrow\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Rachael Myrow\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">, senior editor, Silicon Valley News Desk at KQED\u003c/span>\u003c/li>\n\u003c/ul>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Further Reading/Listening:\u003c/b>\u003c/p>\n\u003cul>\n\u003cli>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12084062/federal-court-rules-against-elon-musk-in-his-bitter-feud-with-sam-altman\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Federal Court Rules Against Elon Musk in His Bitter Feud With Sam Altman\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> — Katie DeBenedetti and Rachael Myrow, \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">KQED\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>\u003ci>\u003c/i>\u003ca href=\"https://www.wired.com/story/fancy-butt-pillows-musk-v-altman-trial/\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Everyone at the Musk v. Altman Trial Is Using Fancy Butt Cushions\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> — Paresh Dave, \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">WIRED\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>\u003ci>\u003c/i>\u003ca href=\"https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/932464/musk-v-altman-proved-that-ai-is-led-by-the-wrong-people\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Musk v. Altman proved that AI is led by the wrong people\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> — Hayden Field, \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">The Verge\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>\u003ci>\u003c/i>\u003ca href=\"https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/13/sam-altman-may-control-our-future-can-he-be-trusted\">\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Sam Altman May Control Our Future—Can He Be Trusted?\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> — Ronan Farrow and Andrew Marantz, \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">The New Yorker\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>\u003ci>\u003c/i>\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/2026/05/20/nx-s1-5822419/ai-colleges-commencement-booing\">Advice for 2026 commencement speakers: Don’t bring up AI\u003c/a> — Jude Joffe-Block and Michelle Aslam, \u003ci>NPR\u003c/i>\u003c/li>\n\u003c/ul>\n\u003cp>Want to give us feedback on the show? Shoot us an email at \u003ca href=\"mailto:CloseAllTabs@KQED.org\">CloseAllTabs@KQED.org\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Follow us on\u003c/span>\u003ca href=\"https://www.instagram.com/closealltabspod/\"> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Instagram\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> and\u003c/span>\u003ca href=\"https://www.tiktok.com/@closealltabs\"> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">TikTok\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-content post-body\">\u003ch2 id=\"episode-transcript\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This is a computer-generated transcript. While our team has reviewed it, there may be errors.\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung, Host: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Hello Tabbers! Tabbies? Tabhive? We’re workshopping this. Ok? \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Anyway, if you’re in the Close All Tabs fandom, and you want more of these deep dives, then please rate and review the show on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you’re listening to this! Post about it! Follow us on Instagram! Tag us! Basically, it would be a huge help to get the word out. Ok, let’s get to the show.\u003c/span>\u003cb>\u003cbr>\n\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">The tech world has been buzzing over one of the juiciest legal showdowns in Silicon Valley: Musk v. Altman. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Basically, Elon Musk, of Tesla and Twitter infamy, accused OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, and its leadership of betraying the company’s nonprofit roots. He alleged that instead of sticking to the original mission, which was to build safe artificial general intelligence for the benefit of all of humanity, the company chased profits over AI safety. He says they “stole a charity.” \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">On the other side: Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI who co-founded the company with Musk. Once upon a time, they were actually buddies. But today? They’re bitter rivals. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">For three weeks, tech billionaires, their legal counsel, their personal security guards, and a throng of journalists packed into a courtroom in Oakland, California. This was a real “who’s who” of the AI industry. The six billionaires who took the stand have a collective net worth of around $850 billion dollars. That’s more than the GDP of most countries. And what did the uber wealthy bring for a long day at court? The hottest accessory in downtown Oakland: Fancy butt cushions. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Record scratch]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow, Guest:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> You know, I have to admit, I was not looking, uh, anywhere in the vicinity of their butts, so I did not see these butt cushions, uh, that I read about in Wired. But, um, I, I did see some more, you know, sober, uh, sensible butt cushions that the lawyers were using.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This is Rachael Myrow, she’s the Silicon Valley tech editor at KQED, and she covered the case, trekking out for the grueling 12 days of trial. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> And I really should have come up with one of my own because we were in that court, courtroom from 8am in the morning to 2 in the afternoon most days.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This trial was one of the courtroom dramas of the decade. Rachael said it was like \u003c/span>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Silicon Valley\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">, the HBO show, meets a telenovela. Before it even started, Musk got so catty online that the judge threatened him with a gag order.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">He went on X on the eve of the trial, popping off about Scam Altman until Judge Gonzalez Rogers dressed him down in front of the court.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">That’s just the start of this gossip feast. We’re talking backstabbing! Personal diary entries read aloud! Secret affairs! Over 20 witnesses airing out everyone’s dirty laundry. And after all of that, the jury sided with OpenAI. So does this count as a crushing blow to Elon Musk?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Musk operates like President Trump. He sues for all sorts of reasons, and he also counts a win differently than normal people would count a win.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And he doesn’t need to win in the courtroom to win in other ways. Because nobody walked out of this trial looking great, especially not Sam Altman.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The historical record now shows a group of extraordinarily entitled people, mostly men, scrambling to be the tip of the spear for the AI revolution. Uh, I think the benefit of humanity never had anything to do with it.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">At the end of the day, nobody really won here. We’re going to get into that and open a few tabs about the trial, the drama leading up to it, the great billionaire AI industry reckoning and what this really means for the rest of us plebeians. Ready?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This is Close All Tabs. I’m Morgan Sung, tech journalist and your chronically online friend, here to open as many browser tabs as it takes to help you understand how the digital world affects our real lives. Let’s get into it. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Ok, let’s open our first tab: Sam Altman, Elon Musk relationship timeline \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">K-dramas, telenovelas, any CW show, pick your poison. At its core, this scenario is a soap opera classic. Two besties have a falling out, struggle for power, and forgetting what they once meant to each other become embroiled in a years-long feud, hell bent on taking the other down. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> I don’t know if they ever were friends. But also I wouldn’t say that they were frenemies, and again, this is just from my experience of the trial, \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Ok, maybe that was a little bit of fanfiction. But we can’t write off their tech bromance entirely. After all, during the trial, Altman testified under oath that Musk used to show him memes on his phone. That’s pretty intimate, if you ask me. And years before that, they were two very rich guys who shared a dream.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Elon Musk in particular, uh, was very worried about the thought that artificial general intelligence, which is to say AI that surpasses human intelligence, uh, could, uh, come to the hands of one powerful player first, and then they would have, I don’t know, world domination within their grasp. So he got together with Sam Altman of Y Combinator fame or infamy, however you see it, \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Y Combinator is the startup accelerator that launched Reddit, Airbnb, DoorDash, Dropbox, Stripe, Coinbase, the list goes on. Sam Altman was part of the inaugural cohort. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And the two of them cooked up this nonprofit with a charitable mission. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">They launched OpenAI in 2015, as a nonprofit artificial intelligence research company. In the first blog post, the company wrote: “Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">But it doesn’t take long before they realize that if this is gonna be a thing, if this is gonna compete with Google, and whoever else might come along they were gonna need way more money than they were pulling in at the time.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So Elon Musk was spending millions, but they were probably gonna need billions. They started talking about setting up a for-profit division. And it wasn’t long before they realized in this conversation, collectively, that Elon wanted to be in charge of it, in control of it. And you can tell this because, you know, mounds of discovery, personal texts and email chains and personal journal entries made it abundantly clear that Musk was thinking close to the beginning like, ‘I know what I’ll do. We’ll fold this new this for-profit version of OpenAI into Tesla, where I can work on AGI in secret.’\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Well, Sam Altman and the other OpenAI principal co-founders weren’t down for that. Musk walked away in 2018. OpenAI launched ChatGPT in 2022. A year later, Musk announced his own AI startup, xAI, which eventually launched Grok. Musk has boasted about how Grok is not trained to be “woke”, unlike competitors like ChatGPT. OpenAI, meanwhile, has become the belle of the Silicon Valley ball, nabbing billions of dollars of investment from Microsoft. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And at a certain point, it becomes clear that the OpenAI nonprofit is really a shell of its former self. Right? Like, it’s all of the IP, all of the intellectual property has shifted, uh, from the nonprofit to the for-profit, all of the talent…I think it was kind of sitting there employee-free until very recently, and money was put into it. It’s now estimated to be worth about 200 billion, with a B, dollars. But what has this nonprofit been up to? Precious little. Precious little. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And so at some point, Musk decides to sue and to say, ‘Wait a second, you know, um, this is a bait and switch…they’ve abandoned the mission that we cooked up originally and, I want recompense. I want Altman and others, stripped from the board, stripped from their leadership positions. I want, something like $150 billion shifted from the for-profit to the nonprofit.’ But of course, if you’re OpenAI, your attitude is like, ‘Whoa, this is clearly vindictive.’ You know, you didn’t get what you want, that’s why you walked away with your toys and your money, and, uh, you know, we’re gonna see you in court.’\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> This legal showdown has been simmering for years. Between filing in early 2024 and finally walking into the courtroom for his testimony last month, Musk has: filed a motion accusing OpenAI and Microsoft of being a monopoly, led a group of investors in an attempt to buy OpenAI, threatened to sue Apple for giving OpenAI preferential treatment in the App Store, and has gotten into multiple online spats with Altman. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> It was 100% clear there’s no love lost, uh, between you know, the principals. You know, what I like to say is, like, nobody has clean hands in this situation.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> So what exactly happened at this trial? Let’s open another new tab: Musk v. Altman \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> On one side you’ve got Elon Musk. You know, he didn’t come to be the wealthiest person on Earth by accident, right? Uh, even if he may not have been the person to start many of the companies he now owns and controls, uh, he took them into the stratosphere, quite literally in the case of SpaceX.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">He’s very good at doing that, but he’s also well known to be mercurial, to have a kind of Jekyll and Hyde personality, to push other people to the breaking point.\u003c/span> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And, um, he’s gonna make decisions that, uh, he doesn’t expect to be countermanded on in the slightest. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Then you have somebody like Sam Altman, and, uh, I’ll tell you, it wasn’t any accident that The New Yorker came out with a scandalous profile of Sam Altman on the eve of the trial that basically, uh, described him as a compulsive pathological liar, and all of that came out in the trial too. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Let’s go through a few highlights from this trial. It got pretty juicy when Shivon Zillis took the stand. She’s a venture capitalist and machine learning expert who started working at OpenAI when it launched, and later joined the board of directors. She’s also the mother of four of Musk’s fourteen children. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">In her testimony, she said that their relationship started with a “one-off” at a corporate off-site. When she decided to start a family on her own, Musk offered to be her platonic sperm donor. Their relationship grew, and now, they’re romantic partners. She told the OpenAI board about her relationship with Musk only after Business Insider started reporting on it. According to other testimony, many board members wanted to remove her, but decided to let her stay to, “keep the Elon conflict under control.” \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> I think for many people who are not familiar with Silicon Valley shenanigans, going back decades, not, this is not new to AI, um, it’s not just neutral characters on the board. It’s a very insular world. It’s on the level of incest, I would say. And so I, for one, was not shocked to discover that Elon Musk had a, again, like a consigliere on the board making decisions. She seemed to be there in many ways, um, serving as a go-between, between Sam and Elon, helping to smooth over conversations, helping to, to help them reach points of agreement when that was possible, and at the very least, have clarity on what the other side was thinking when that was not. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Something else that also g- kind of struck me about not just Zelis’s testimony, but also the other women who had roles in this period of time at OpenAI that was under discussion, is how much even the smartest women were only number twos, number threes, ancillary characters in a drama that starred men. This is all about men, primarily white men, with a tremendous sense of entitlement.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And then there are these salacious journal entries. So, Greg Brockman is the president of OpenAI, and today, he has a 30 billion dollar stake in the company. But he wasn’t always so ludicrously wealthy. During the trial, pages of his personal diary from nearly 10 years ago were read out loud. And what he wrote seems to bolster Musk’s argument that they were all in it for the money, not necessarily for the good of humanity. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Word to the wise, be aware that if you get sued, they’re gonna come looking for this stuff. You know? Like, when he’s, when he’s writing to himself, “What will take me to $1 billion?” it was pretty clear that it sounded like he was interested in becoming rich. You have a guy who was personally ambitious. Um, is that illegal? I don’t know if it’s illegal. It certainly didn’t look good. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The funny thing here about Zelis, and it’s kind of in parallel to, to Brockman, is that, you know, Zelis was taking notes. And also a lot of Zelis’ emails and texts document how early Musk knew that people were talking about a, uh, a for-profit, that Musk himself was talking about a for-profit form of OpenAI. So this kind of ate away at the argument that he was shocked, shocked to discover that self-enrichment had become such a powerful motivator for his colleagues.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Another standout from the trial: texts between Sam Altman and former OpenAI CTO Mira Murati from the night that the OpenAI board voted to fire Altman as CEO. He was reinstated after over 90% of OpenAI employees threatened to quit and work for Microsoft. That in between time period is known as “The Blip.” And the exchanges from the night it started were read in court, and have since gone viral — immediately embedded in the lexicon of internet reaction memes.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Rachael and I are going to do a dramatic reading of the texts \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> I think I wanna be Mira. Or wait a moment. No, I wanna be Sam. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> You wanna be Sam? Okay. Okay.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Can you indicate directionally good or bad? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Directionally very bad. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Can I come in? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">They don’t want you to.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">What do you want to make it better? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">I’m still willing to just walk away if that helps. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">If they are ramped up for crazy lawsuits against me, then I’m not sure what… \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Can you please tell them I just wanna resolve this however, \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">and would like to join?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">They’re convinced about their decision.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> For me to be fired or some new thing? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Yes, for you to be gone. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Okay. Then can I come in and talk about a path forward with them? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Can you ask why they’ve been saying all weekend they wanted me back?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow as Sam Altman: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Still don’t want me? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Message sent whoosh]\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung as Mira Murati: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">They don’t want you\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> I mean, these read, these read like the kinds of texts that you would send during a really brutal breakup, like when you’re like, ‘Oh, my friend sees my ex in, in public. Can you please go talk to them?’ You know? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Yeah.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">What do they reveal about the power struggle at OpenAI though?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> There was an attempted coup, essentially, precisely because of Sam Altman’s, uh, alleged managerial misbehavior, pitting different people against each other with different stories.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Another OpenAI board member, Helen Toner, shed light on this in her deposition. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Helen Toner basically said that Altman lied about what kind of safety reviews were done about, uh, models of ChatGPT that were released, that he ultimately cleared for release, and which, you know, she could say really wasn’t about AI safety, It was about this, you know, lack of trust in the communication. Microsoft, uh, CEO Satya Nadella, at one point he characterized the entire blip as amateur hour. Uh, these naive board members thinking that they could, you know, hold Sam Altman accountable, uh, for, for lying to them. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Right. I mean, Brockman and Altman were both throwing around some pretty wild accusations about why Musk really wanted control of OpenAI. Um, Brockman said that he wanted to raise massive amounts of money to build a colony on Mars. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Um, Sam Altman claimed that Musk was planning to pass OpenAI down to his children when he died, like succession style. But I mean, everyone’s dirty laundry was aired out in that courtroom. Like, no one came out with clean hands, including Sam Altman. So what did the witnesses say about him and his character? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Oh my goodness. There were so many people who described him as a liar to the extent that when finally he was directly questioned about being a liar, uh, and he didn’t answer the question directly, it just made him look more like a liar. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">There were so many people who talked about his lack of, uh, trustworthiness. Sam Altman on the witness stand for hours being asked why he’s such a big liar. His former chief scientist, his former chief technology officer, two former board members, all testifying under oath that Altman exhibited a consistent pattern of dishonesty.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">That is now in the public record forever.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">all of these guys come off as self-serving and, and, uh, backstabbing and oily. I wouldn’t wanna meet any of them in a dark alley or on the other side of a business deal. You know, like, they’re obviously not out for the benefit of humanity. But then we knew that. Didn’t we know that? I think we knew that. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">After all that, mountains of evidence, hours of testimony, brutal days spent on those cold, hard, unforgiving courtroom benches, unless you had a fancy butt cushion, the ending of this trial was kind of anticlimactic. It took the jury just two hours to come to a unanimous decision. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The jury decided that Musk simply waited too long to sue. California has statutes of limitations. So you can’t just sit on your claims forever.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So, in the end nothing happened! But that doesn’t mean the trial was for nothing. What’s the real outcome here? What did this courtroom drama really reveal? After the break, a new tab. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">But first, we wanted to remind you that Close All Tabs depends on listeners like you to keep us going. You can support us by becoming a member at donate.kqed.org/podcasts. Ok, after the break? We’re leaving the courtroom, and going back to the real world. Stick around.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> We’re back! Let’s open one last tab: Musk v. Altman outcome.\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So the jury rejected Musk’s case this week. But it’s important to note that they didn’t make that decision based on the legal merit of his case, just that it was too late for Musk to pursue it. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And the jury found that Musk knew or should have known what was happening at OpenAI by 2020 at the latest. He filed in 2024. He argued in court, you know, that that’s because it wasn’t that he was opposed to any kind of for-profit division. He just didn’t want one that dominated the nonprofit. And that didn’t become clear to him until 2023. So he wanted to essentially start the clock on the statue of limitations later on in the game\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">But OpenAI argued and the judge essentially agreed that Musk needed to have made the case soon after what he saw happening at OpenAI by 2020 at the latest. So all three claims, breach of charitable trust, unjust enrichment, Microsoft aiding and abetting, are gone because of the statute of limitations thing, not because they decided on the merits.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Hours after the verdict came out, Elon Musk responded in the most Elon Musk possible way, which is he took it to Twitter, uh, sorry, X, to complain. Um, he did a classic tweet and delete. So the first tweet he said, first post, “This illustrates why the ruling by the terrible activist Oakland judge, who simply used the jury as a fig leaf, creates such a terrible precedent. She just handed a free license to loot charities if you can keep the looting quiet for a few years.” And then deleted that. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Then followed up, “Regarding the OpenAI 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 following the case in detail that Altman and Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is when they did it.” \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Did this response surprise you at all?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> Not in the slightest. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So now that she makes clear she agrees with the jury, Musk posted ‘she’s a terrible activist Oakland judge who handed out a free license to loot charities.’ Musk is just not sympathetic. Um, but I’m thinking, like President Trump, it wasn’t necessarily important to Musk to win the case, just to file it, to drag Altman through the mud in a very public way ahead of these two IPOs. If what you what is revenge, that’s not nothing.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This trial did a number on Sam Altman’s public image. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> It certainly revealed a lot of the circular business deals he was involved in. He may have recused himself from the actual votes with some of these companies but he nonetheless profited from them or could profit in the near future. I think this was a habit he picked up at Y Combinator. Anyway, it was laid bare in the courtroom. I think it put another nail in the coffin. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Like, there were protesters outside the courthouse with some very funny signs up. And they poked the most fun at Musk, but they also poked a lot of fun at Sam Altman. You know, it’s Sam Altman’s house that got a Molotov cocktail thrown at it.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">You know, like, I think there is a great deal of public discontent, even rage over the rollout of AI into all of our lives. And, you know, this train got rolling out of the station through OpenAI, through ChatGPT, uh, and, you know, it was off to the races for a bunch of companies. But there at the forefront, at least in the beginning, was OpenAI, and Sam Altman is the face of OpenAI. And so this trial and all the mountains of evidence just confirm for people their opinions of Sam Altman.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">You know, if there’s a fan club somebody’s gotta send me a T-shirt to prove it.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> A lot of Silicon Valley tends to operate in a kind of bubble, disconnected from the public’s growing discontent around AI. Students are graduating into increasingly unstable careers, thanks to companies pushing to replace human workers with AI, regardless of whether AI can do the jobs better. Nothing shows that disconnect quite like the reaction to commencement speakers who tried to praise AI to a room full of new graduates. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">[Audio clip from University of Central Florida Graduation] \u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Speaker: The rise of artificial intelligence is the next industrial revolution.\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Crowd: Boos \u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003ci>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Speaker: Woo! What happened? Ok, I struck a chord! \u003c/span>\u003c/i>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Multiple commencement speakers across the country have tried to proselytize AI this month and they were booed each time. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This rejection is not unfounded. While covering the trial, Rachael spoke to one of the protesters outside of the courthouse. Her name is Valerie. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Valerie Sizemore:\u003c/b> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">I used to be a software engineer, but, um, have been unemployed by AI, so now I’m trying to make the resistance happen.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">So this trial, um, these two CEOs are fighting over a piece of a pie that, uh, doesn’t really matter for the world. They’re just trying to make themselves richer, but we’re all gonna lose regardless of who wins.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The AI titans, and they are titans now, keep mistaking public resistance for ignorance. Somebody like Valerie isn’t failing to understand the wonders of AI. She’s recognizing that the costs like higher power bills, strained electrical grids, her job disappearing on, her career disappearing on her. Right? A technology class that treats the question of public consent as an annoying inconvenience. I guess what I’m getting at here, Morgan, is that we’re not talking about a PR problem. We’re talking about class warfare.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This was a battle between two billionaires. The trial revolved around this core question: Is OpenAI’s commitment to the benefit of humanity real? Or, is the company’s commitment really to chasing profits at the expense of AI safety? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">What was supposed to be the trial of the century ended without answers or accountability. And by ruling on timing instead of the actual merits of the case, the trial also failed to establish any legal precedent for AI governance and guardrails. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> It’s not gonna do a damn thing to stop this nightmare. Right? Obviously there’s gonna be an appeal from Musk’s attorneys. Who knows what’ll happen there? But you know, both Musk with his SpaceX IPO and Altman with his OpenAI IPO, they’re just gonna go forward as before. The AI rollout will go on as before.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Who knows if we’ll ever get artificial general intelligence per se? I don’t think it matters. I mean, the changes that have been happening have been happening without artificial general intelligence. They’re, they’re disruptive enough. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> How do you think this case will impact future AI cases?\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> OpenAI is a strange creature. It started as a nonprofit, maybe because Musk and Altman intuitively knew that, uh, they had a better chance of raising money at that time if they presented it as for the good of humanity as opposed to, you know, just a chance to get in on this gold rush.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Right? And, and it must be said, and you know, many of the OpenAI principals said it many times that in the beginning, in the first few years of OpenAI, it was not clear at all it was gonna succeed, right? Google seemed to have such a head start and such a well-capitalized head start. So, you know, OpenAI has only become fabulously valued, um, in recent years, and it, it’s still not making money.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">To go back to, you know, like what, what precedent does this set for Silicon Valley? I don’t know that it sets any precedent because who in their right mind would start something like OpenAI again in that way? You would set up a startup like any other group of entrepreneurs and take your chances with that setup.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung:\u003c/b> \u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">All of this theater ended with no real answers, no real accountability, and no real change for the AI industry overall. So then was the point of taking this case to court in the first place? \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow:\u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\"> The judge put tight, and I mean tight brackets around what this case was going to be about at trial, which raises the question for me, why did she take this case in the first place?Why did she give Elon Musk standing if he had unclean hands? He was a rival. He was a competitor in the AI space. \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">I think that Gonzalez Rogers wanted these guys on both sides to be forced to peel back the curtain on how AI came to dominate the world in the way that it does now. And maybe the judge couldn’t give us accountability, but she could give us visibility, and that’s not nothing.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And another upside: all those juicy, salacious details that were once just gossip fodder, that’s public record now. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Rachael Myrow: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Is there any legal precedent here? I think maybe the point was the theater.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cb>Morgan Sung: \u003c/b>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">That’s it for this episode, but stick around after the credits. Ok, let’s close all these tabs. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Close All Tabs is a production of KQED Studios, and is reported and hosted by me, Morgan Sung. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This episode was produced by Chris Egusa and edited by Chris Hambrick. \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">The Close All Tabs team also includes producer Maya Cueva and audio engineer Brendan Willard. Additional music by APM.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Audience engagement support from Maha Sanad. Jen Chien is our Director of Podcasts, and Ethan Toven-Lindsey is our Editor in Chief.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists. San Francisco Northern California Local.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">This episode’s keyboard sounds were submitted by my dad, Casey Sung, and recorded on his white and blue Epomaker Aula F99 keyboard with Graywood v3 switches and Cherry profile PBT keycaps.\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Thanks for listening! \u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Rachael Myrow: Steve Molo, uh, the Musk’s attorney: “Have you misled people with whom you do business?” \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Altman “I do not think so.” \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And then Molo says, “Would they think so?”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">And then Altman says, “I can’t answer that.”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Molo says, “You’ve repeatedly been called a liar by people with whom you’ve done business.”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Altman: “I have heard people say that.” \u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Molo: “Are you completely trustworthy?”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Altman: “I believe so.”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Molo: “You don’t know?”\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">\u003cbr>\n\u003c/span>\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: 400\">Altman: “I’ll just amend my answer to yes.”\u003c/span>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>"
}
],
"link": "/news/12085236/musk-v-altman-was-peak-silicon-valley-theatrics",
"authors": [
"11944",
"11869",
"11943",
"11832"
],
"programs": [
"news_35082"
],
"categories": [
"news_33520"
],
"tags": [
"news_25184",
"news_34755",
"news_22973",
"news_3897",
"news_3137",
"news_34646",
"news_33543"
],
"featImg": "news_12085240",
"label": "source_news_12085236"
},
"news_12084062": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12084062",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12084062",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1779131568000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "federal-court-rules-against-elon-musk-in-his-bitter-feud-with-sam-altman",
"title": "Federal Court Rules Against Elon Musk in His Bitter Feud With Sam Altman",
"publishDate": 1779131568,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Federal Court Rules Against Elon Musk in His Bitter Feud With Sam Altman | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>Elon Musk’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081290/how-to-unscramble-an-omelet-in-silicon-valley-the-musk-v-altman-trial-that-will-try\">lawsuit against his OpenAI co-founders\u003c/a> has been rejected by a federal judge in Oakland, who found his claims were outside the statute of limitations.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk, who helped form OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015, had alleged that co-founders Sam Altman and Greg Brockman violated the company’s original nonprofit mission to create safe and open-source artificial intelligence in order to enrich themselves. An Oakland jury took just a few hours to declare that Musk’s claim came too late. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who had the final say in the case, agreed with the jury’s advisory verdict.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“The finding of the jury confirms that what this lawsuit was, was a hypocritical attempt to sabotage a competitor and to overcome a long history of very bad predictions about what OpenAI has been and will become,” Altman’s lead counsel, William Savitt, told reporters outside the courthouse Monday.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The verdict comes after a weekslong blockbuster trial in Silicon Valley, in which the Tesla CEO accused Altman and Brockman of \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity\">“stealing a charity\u003c/a>” as they built a more than $850 million company on the back of their nonprofit. Court documents and testimony from \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12083224/former-openai-exec-calls-decision-to-remove-sam-altman-a-hail-mary-during-musk-trial\">a score of tech elites\u003c/a>, including Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, shed light on the rise of OpenAI — as well as on \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12083278/sam-altman-defends-himself-from-elon-musks-accusations-in-openai-trial\">the interpersonal strife\u003c/a> and \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12083612/lawyers-for-elon-musk-and-sam-altman-make-their-final-case-in-openai-trial\">falling out between Altman and Musk\u003c/a>, who were once close friends.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s high-profile testimony in the case also raised questions over Altman’s trustworthiness and leadership as the company pursues artificial general intelligence, a superintelligent form of AI and a potential trillion-dollar initial public offering.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12084143\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12084143\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">The verdict is read in the trial in which Elon Musk claimed that Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity rather than solely for profit in Oakland on May 18, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Altman’s defense argued that OpenAI had to form a profit-generating arm to keep up with competitors as AI technology advanced. They said that prior to leaving OpenAI, Musk was amenable to creating a for-profit, which he wanted to control. When other executives refused to agree to his terms, he left the company.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But Monday’s verdict disregarded many of the trial’s revelations, and instead hinged on the timeline of Musk’s claims.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The jury agreed with OpenAI’s defense that Musk missed the statute of limitations to allege a breach of charitable trust. They also dismissed a claim that Microsoft, OpenAI’s largest investor, aided and abetted a breach of charitable trust.[aside postID=news_12083612 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty.jpg']Sarah Eddy, an attorney for OpenAI, noted in her closing argument that Musk departed the company in 2018, watched it build up a for-profit arm beginning in 2019 and made his final monetary contribution the year after that. Yet, he waited until 2024, after he’d launched a competing AI enterprise, to bring his suit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She called the case a “textbook” example of why the statute of limitations exists, saying that when Musk made his last contribution and testified that he became suspicious of a breach of charitable trust in 2020, he “started the clock.” According to Eddy, Musk should have sued by 2022 at the latest.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s counsel, Marc Toberoff, said there was a strong basis for appeal based on the legal components, statute of limitations aside. Musk also wrote on X, which he owns, that he planned to file an appeal.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is WHEN they did it!” he wrote. “Creating a precedent to loot charities is incredibly destructive to charitable giving in America.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Outside the court, anti-AI protesters who have been present for much of the trial decried the decision.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“No matter who won, we all lost,” said Phoebe Thomas Sorgen, an activist with StopAI, which seeks to “disrupt the reckless development of destructive” AI tech, according to its website. “We all lost. Sam Altman won, but look at who he is and what he’s doing.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "A U.S. judge and jury in Oakland found that the Tesla CEO filed his lawsuit against his former OpenAI co-founders too late. ",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1779143179,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 15,
"wordCount": 744
},
"headData": {
"title": "Federal Court Rules Against Elon Musk in His Bitter Feud With Sam Altman | KQED",
"description": "A U.S. judge and jury in Oakland found that the Tesla CEO filed his lawsuit against his former OpenAI co-founders too late. ",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Federal Court Rules Against Elon Musk in His Bitter Feud With Sam Altman",
"datePublished": "2026-05-18T12:12:48-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-05-18T15:26:19-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 248,
"slug": "technology",
"name": "Technology"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12084062",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12084062/federal-court-rules-against-elon-musk-in-his-bitter-feud-with-sam-altman",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Elon Musk’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081290/how-to-unscramble-an-omelet-in-silicon-valley-the-musk-v-altman-trial-that-will-try\">lawsuit against his OpenAI co-founders\u003c/a> has been rejected by a federal judge in Oakland, who found his claims were outside the statute of limitations.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk, who helped form OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015, had alleged that co-founders Sam Altman and Greg Brockman violated the company’s original nonprofit mission to create safe and open-source artificial intelligence in order to enrich themselves. An Oakland jury took just a few hours to declare that Musk’s claim came too late. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who had the final say in the case, agreed with the jury’s advisory verdict.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“The finding of the jury confirms that what this lawsuit was, was a hypocritical attempt to sabotage a competitor and to overcome a long history of very bad predictions about what OpenAI has been and will become,” Altman’s lead counsel, William Savitt, told reporters outside the courthouse Monday.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The verdict comes after a weekslong blockbuster trial in Silicon Valley, in which the Tesla CEO accused Altman and Brockman of \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity\">“stealing a charity\u003c/a>” as they built a more than $850 million company on the back of their nonprofit. Court documents and testimony from \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12083224/former-openai-exec-calls-decision-to-remove-sam-altman-a-hail-mary-during-musk-trial\">a score of tech elites\u003c/a>, including Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, shed light on the rise of OpenAI — as well as on \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12083278/sam-altman-defends-himself-from-elon-musks-accusations-in-openai-trial\">the interpersonal strife\u003c/a> and \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12083612/lawyers-for-elon-musk-and-sam-altman-make-their-final-case-in-openai-trial\">falling out between Altman and Musk\u003c/a>, who were once close friends.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s high-profile testimony in the case also raised questions over Altman’s trustworthiness and leadership as the company pursues artificial general intelligence, a superintelligent form of AI and a potential trillion-dollar initial public offering.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12084143\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12084143\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260518-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">The verdict is read in the trial in which Elon Musk claimed that Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity rather than solely for profit in Oakland on May 18, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Altman’s defense argued that OpenAI had to form a profit-generating arm to keep up with competitors as AI technology advanced. They said that prior to leaving OpenAI, Musk was amenable to creating a for-profit, which he wanted to control. When other executives refused to agree to his terms, he left the company.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But Monday’s verdict disregarded many of the trial’s revelations, and instead hinged on the timeline of Musk’s claims.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The jury agreed with OpenAI’s defense that Musk missed the statute of limitations to allege a breach of charitable trust. They also dismissed a claim that Microsoft, OpenAI’s largest investor, aided and abetted a breach of charitable trust.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12083612",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/OpenAILawyerGetty.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>Sarah Eddy, an attorney for OpenAI, noted in her closing argument that Musk departed the company in 2018, watched it build up a for-profit arm beginning in 2019 and made his final monetary contribution the year after that. Yet, he waited until 2024, after he’d launched a competing AI enterprise, to bring his suit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She called the case a “textbook” example of why the statute of limitations exists, saying that when Musk made his last contribution and testified that he became suspicious of a breach of charitable trust in 2020, he “started the clock.” According to Eddy, Musk should have sued by 2022 at the latest.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s counsel, Marc Toberoff, said there was a strong basis for appeal based on the legal components, statute of limitations aside. Musk also wrote on X, which he owns, that he planned to file an appeal.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is WHEN they did it!” he wrote. “Creating a precedent to loot charities is incredibly destructive to charitable giving in America.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Outside the court, anti-AI protesters who have been present for much of the trial decried the decision.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“No matter who won, we all lost,” said Phoebe Thomas Sorgen, an activist with StopAI, which seeks to “disrupt the reckless development of destructive” AI tech, according to its website. “We all lost. Sam Altman won, but look at who he is and what he’s doing.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12084062/federal-court-rules-against-elon-musk-in-his-bitter-feud-with-sam-altman",
"authors": [
"11913",
"251"
],
"categories": [
"news_6188",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_248"
],
"tags": [
"news_34755",
"news_1386",
"news_32668",
"news_3897",
"news_34054",
"news_33542",
"news_33543",
"news_34586",
"news_1631"
],
"featImg": "news_12084126",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12083612": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12083612",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12083612",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1778805082000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "lawyers-for-elon-musk-and-sam-altman-make-their-final-case-in-openai-trial",
"title": "Lawyers for Elon Musk and Sam Altman Make Their Final Case in OpenAI Trial",
"publishDate": 1778805082,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Lawyers for Elon Musk and Sam Altman Make Their Final Case in OpenAI Trial | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>Whether \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/openai\">OpenAI\u003c/a> CEO \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/sam-altman\">Sam Altman\u003c/a> and other executives betrayed their commitment to building a safe, open-source artificial intelligence, slighting billionaire Elon Musk in the process, will be decided by an Oakland jury and judge.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>For weeks, the tech executives have sparred in federal court over whether the startup, first proposed by Altman to Musk as a sort of AI “Manhattan Project,” has abandoned its original mission to enrich itself. Musk, who provided $38 million in early funding, has accused his former OpenAI co-founders Altman and Greg Brockman of “stealing a charity.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>OpenAI’s executives, on the other hand, have said Musk only sued after he brought his own AI competitor, xAI, onto the market.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>During his closing statement, Musk’s lead counsel, Steven Molo, focused on Altman’s credibility. He asked the jury to consider hypothetically what they would do if they came upon a bridge, suspended 150 feet above a river, and built on Altman’s “version of the truth.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Would you walk across that bridge?” He asked. “I don’t think many people would.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo said that in the early years of OpenAI, the intent was to create a technology “for the good of the world.” He pointed to Musk’s early fears of the dangers of artificial general intelligence, or AGI, an early mission statement that said OpenAI would not be constrained by a need to generate financial return and correspondence between Altman and Musk that expressed support by both of them for a nonprofit structure and safety-focused mission.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081686\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081686\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Steve Molo, Elon Musk’s attorney, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk (center-right) claims that Sam Altman (right) and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“There was no disagreement over the core mission,” Molo said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But, he said, since OpenAI launched a for-profit subsidiary in 2019 — after Musk departed — Altman and his fellow executives have treated the nonprofit as a “shell,” transferring intellectual property and the vast majority of employees to the for-profit arm of the company. In 2023, Molo continued, after OpenAI made a $10 billion deal with Microsoft, the company failed to prioritize safety, abandoned its commitment to open sourcing and “enriched investors and insiders.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“They’re motivated by money: Microsoft and Altman,” Molo said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testified that the company had invested $13 billion and expects to see a return of about $92 billion. Molo also pointed out that other executives, including Brockman and founding OpenAI computer scientist Ilya Sutskever, testified to having billions in equity, despite not investing in the company.[aside postID=news_12083278 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED.jpg']Altman’s attorneys argued that Musk’s case was baseless: not only was Molo’s characterization false, but they argued, the larger issue is that Musk’s contributions to OpenAI — in the form of rent payments, Tesla Model 3 cars and $25 million in quarterly donations — were never accompanied by specific promises for their use.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If the donations came with no strings attached, then Mr. Musk does not have a charitable trust to enforce,” Sarah Eddy, an attorney for OpenAI’s defendants, said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She and Altman’s lead counsel, William Savitt, also spent much of their closing arguments painting Musk as not wanting to protect humanity from AGI, as he’s suggested, but wanting to be the one who controls it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>They allege Musk brought his suit after he tried to wrest control of a potential for-profit arm of OpenAI, and later absorb the organization into Tesla, in 2017. The executives had begun discussing a for-profit expansion that year to solicit more funding for top talent and “compute” to compete with other industry leaders.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk departed OpenAI in February 2018, after a falling-out with the other executives over those discussions.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12075382\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12075382\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/03/260304-Elon-Musk-Trial-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/03/260304-Elon-Musk-Trial-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/03/260304-Elon-Musk-Trial-01-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/03/260304-Elon-Musk-Trial-01-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">A courtroom sketch of Elon Musk on the stand as he’s questioned by the plaintiff’s attorney, Aaron P. Arnzen, on March 4, 2026. Musk is accused of making false and misleading statements that drove down Twitter’s stock price before he bought the social media platform for $44 billion in 2022. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Shortly after, OpenAI decided to introduce a for-profit public benefit corporation. It has since become a $850 billion company, and is considering an initial public offering estimated at up to a trillion dollars.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>OpenAI’s attorneys alleged that Musk saw OpenAI’s skyrocketing success and filed his suit to destroy a competitor in the field.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“The truth is that Mr. Musk wanted a for-profit AI, and he wanted to dominate it,” Eddy said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The jury is set to begin deliberations on Monday. If they side with Musk, OpenAI and Microsoft could owe $150 billion in damages to be redirected to the nonprofit foundation, along with a court order dismantling OpenAI’s for-profit structure and removal of Altman and Brockman from their posts.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12083616\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12083616\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Gonzalez-Rogers-Yvonne.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1334\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Gonzalez-Rogers-Yvonne.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Gonzalez-Rogers-Yvonne-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Gonzalez-Rogers-Yvonne-1536x1025.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. \u003ccite>(Courtesy of Daily Journal)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The jury will not have the final say, though. In a rare, but not unprecedented, move, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will have the ultimate right to rule on the claims.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to Charlie Bullock, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Law and AI, this is because most times, “equitable claims” — breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment — which involve non-monetary remedies, are decided by a judge.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In this case, Gonzalez Rogers elected to have an advisory jury, and Bullock said that typically, judges choose to go along with their decision.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "An Oakland judge and jury will decide whether the company behind ChatGPT betrayed its mission of developing a safer, less risky AI. ",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1778813223,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 23,
"wordCount": 1022
},
"headData": {
"title": "Lawyers for Elon Musk and Sam Altman Make Their Final Case in OpenAI Trial | KQED",
"description": "An Oakland judge and jury will decide whether the company behind ChatGPT betrayed its mission of developing a safer, less risky AI. ",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Lawyers for Elon Musk and Sam Altman Make Their Final Case in OpenAI Trial",
"datePublished": "2026-05-14T17:31:22-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-05-14T19:47:03-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 248,
"slug": "technology",
"name": "Technology"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12083612",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12083612/lawyers-for-elon-musk-and-sam-altman-make-their-final-case-in-openai-trial",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Whether \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/openai\">OpenAI\u003c/a> CEO \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/sam-altman\">Sam Altman\u003c/a> and other executives betrayed their commitment to building a safe, open-source artificial intelligence, slighting billionaire Elon Musk in the process, will be decided by an Oakland jury and judge.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>For weeks, the tech executives have sparred in federal court over whether the startup, first proposed by Altman to Musk as a sort of AI “Manhattan Project,” has abandoned its original mission to enrich itself. Musk, who provided $38 million in early funding, has accused his former OpenAI co-founders Altman and Greg Brockman of “stealing a charity.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>OpenAI’s executives, on the other hand, have said Musk only sued after he brought his own AI competitor, xAI, onto the market.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>During his closing statement, Musk’s lead counsel, Steven Molo, focused on Altman’s credibility. He asked the jury to consider hypothetically what they would do if they came upon a bridge, suspended 150 feet above a river, and built on Altman’s “version of the truth.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Would you walk across that bridge?” He asked. “I don’t think many people would.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo said that in the early years of OpenAI, the intent was to create a technology “for the good of the world.” He pointed to Musk’s early fears of the dangers of artificial general intelligence, or AGI, an early mission statement that said OpenAI would not be constrained by a need to generate financial return and correspondence between Altman and Musk that expressed support by both of them for a nonprofit structure and safety-focused mission.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081686\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081686\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Steve Molo, Elon Musk’s attorney, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk (center-right) claims that Sam Altman (right) and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“There was no disagreement over the core mission,” Molo said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But, he said, since OpenAI launched a for-profit subsidiary in 2019 — after Musk departed — Altman and his fellow executives have treated the nonprofit as a “shell,” transferring intellectual property and the vast majority of employees to the for-profit arm of the company. In 2023, Molo continued, after OpenAI made a $10 billion deal with Microsoft, the company failed to prioritize safety, abandoned its commitment to open sourcing and “enriched investors and insiders.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“They’re motivated by money: Microsoft and Altman,” Molo said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testified that the company had invested $13 billion and expects to see a return of about $92 billion. Molo also pointed out that other executives, including Brockman and founding OpenAI computer scientist Ilya Sutskever, testified to having billions in equity, despite not investing in the company.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12083278",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-03-KQED.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>Altman’s attorneys argued that Musk’s case was baseless: not only was Molo’s characterization false, but they argued, the larger issue is that Musk’s contributions to OpenAI — in the form of rent payments, Tesla Model 3 cars and $25 million in quarterly donations — were never accompanied by specific promises for their use.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If the donations came with no strings attached, then Mr. Musk does not have a charitable trust to enforce,” Sarah Eddy, an attorney for OpenAI’s defendants, said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She and Altman’s lead counsel, William Savitt, also spent much of their closing arguments painting Musk as not wanting to protect humanity from AGI, as he’s suggested, but wanting to be the one who controls it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>They allege Musk brought his suit after he tried to wrest control of a potential for-profit arm of OpenAI, and later absorb the organization into Tesla, in 2017. The executives had begun discussing a for-profit expansion that year to solicit more funding for top talent and “compute” to compete with other industry leaders.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk departed OpenAI in February 2018, after a falling-out with the other executives over those discussions.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12075382\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12075382\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/03/260304-Elon-Musk-Trial-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/03/260304-Elon-Musk-Trial-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/03/260304-Elon-Musk-Trial-01-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/03/260304-Elon-Musk-Trial-01-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">A courtroom sketch of Elon Musk on the stand as he’s questioned by the plaintiff’s attorney, Aaron P. Arnzen, on March 4, 2026. Musk is accused of making false and misleading statements that drove down Twitter’s stock price before he bought the social media platform for $44 billion in 2022. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Shortly after, OpenAI decided to introduce a for-profit public benefit corporation. It has since become a $850 billion company, and is considering an initial public offering estimated at up to a trillion dollars.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>OpenAI’s attorneys alleged that Musk saw OpenAI’s skyrocketing success and filed his suit to destroy a competitor in the field.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“The truth is that Mr. Musk wanted a for-profit AI, and he wanted to dominate it,” Eddy said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The jury is set to begin deliberations on Monday. If they side with Musk, OpenAI and Microsoft could owe $150 billion in damages to be redirected to the nonprofit foundation, along with a court order dismantling OpenAI’s for-profit structure and removal of Altman and Brockman from their posts.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12083616\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12083616\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Gonzalez-Rogers-Yvonne.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1334\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Gonzalez-Rogers-Yvonne.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Gonzalez-Rogers-Yvonne-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/Gonzalez-Rogers-Yvonne-1536x1025.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. \u003ccite>(Courtesy of Daily Journal)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The jury will not have the final say, though. In a rare, but not unprecedented, move, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will have the ultimate right to rule on the claims.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to Charlie Bullock, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Law and AI, this is because most times, “equitable claims” — breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment — which involve non-monetary remedies, are decided by a judge.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In this case, Gonzalez Rogers elected to have an advisory jury, and Bullock said that typically, judges choose to go along with their decision.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12083612/lawyers-for-elon-musk-and-sam-altman-make-their-final-case-in-openai-trial",
"authors": [
"11913",
"251"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_248"
],
"tags": [
"news_34755",
"news_1386",
"news_32668",
"news_3897",
"news_21891",
"news_34054",
"news_33542",
"news_33543",
"news_34586",
"news_1631"
],
"featImg": "news_12083803",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12083278": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12083278",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12083278",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1778629278000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "sam-altman-defends-himself-from-elon-musks-accusations-in-openai-trial",
"title": "Sam Altman Defends Himself From Elon Musk’s Accusations in OpenAI Trial",
"publishDate": 1778629278,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Sam Altman Defends Himself From Elon Musk’s Accusations in OpenAI Trial | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>On the stand on Tuesday, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said that Elon Musk tried to \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081916/are-elon-musk-and-openai-fighting-an-ai-arms-race-sam-altmans-lawyers-think-so\">wrest control over the company\u003c/a> they co-founded before the Tesla CEO’s 2018 exit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman’s testimony in the federal trial in Oakland, which many see as a billionaire grudge match, pushed back on Musk’s claim that the powerful AI start-up betrayed its mission to benefit the public good. Musk has accused Altman of \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity\">“stealing a charity” \u003c/a>by building an $850 million for-profit company on the back of its nonprofit research lab.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said that in early discussions about creating a for-profit arm, Musk sought majority ownership, and later proposed folding the nonprofit into his car company.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I read that as a lightweight threat,” Altman said of the plan to bring OpenAI into Tesla. “I don’t think it would have served the mission. I think it would have effectively destroyed the nonprofit in the process.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Mr. Musk did try to kill it, I guess twice,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>As early as summer 2017, Altman, Musk and other OpenAI executives began discussing if and how to launch a for-profit, citing a need to raise more money to keep up with competitors like Google.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12083394\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12083394 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI CEO Sam Altman testifies in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity rather than solely for profit in Oakland on May 12, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Altman said they were “running the organization on a shoestring,” with a short runway of cash. To acquire the compute — or the GPUs and CPUs needed to power AI — and funding they needed to pursue artificial general intelligence, or a superintelligent AI technology known as AGI, the company would need more significant investments, the executives determined.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I thought, of course, we needed to raise billions to quickly ramp,” he said. “I saw no way to do it.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman, Greg Brockman, the president of OpenAI and Ilya Sutskever, a former top OpenAI computer scientist and member of its founding team, have said that in those conversations, Musk repeatedly proposed plans that would give him majority control. Initially, Altman said that he asked for 90% equity in a potential for-profit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The other executives pushed back on this request, including in an email Altman sent to Musk at the time, in which he said, “I am worried about control. I don’t think any one person should have control of the world’s first AGI — in fact, the whole reason we started OpenAI is so that wouldn’t happen.”[aside postID=news_12083224 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty.jpg']Altman described Musk as “mercurial,” and said that when he left OpenAI in February 2018, after for-profit discussions fell apart, “people wondered if he’d try to take a vengeance on us” — which both he and his attorney, William Savitt, have alleged is exactly what Musk’s lawsuit aims to do.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>During his cross-examination, though, Musk’s counsel Steven Molo seemed to suggest that it is Altman who has amassed significant control over OpenAI since it did launch a for-profit arm in 2019.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo asked Altman about the testimonies of various former OpenAI executives, who said he was untrustworthy and had a history of lying. Altman denied hearing those testimonies, but when asked if he had “repeatedly been called a liar” by people he has done business with, he said, “I have heard people say that.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo said that Altman sits on the board of directors for both the OpenAI Foundation, the nonprofit arm, and OpenAI’s for-profit. He is also the company’s CEO.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Would you ever fire yourself as the CEO of the for-profit?” Molo said, adding that the board of the nonprofit is supposed to provide oversight for the chief officer.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said that CEOs are “almost always” on their company’s boards. When pressed, he said he had “no plans” to fire himself.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12083294\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12083294\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Bret Taylor testifies in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity rather than solely for profit in Oakland on May 12, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Molo also asked Altman about how board members were selected following his brief firing in 2023. During the five-day ouster, there were long negotiations behind the scenes about whether Altman would return, and who would be on the board if he did. Altman, Brockman and other OpenAI executives who followed them out were also in discussions with Microsoft, OpenAI’s largest financial backer, which had offered to bring them on to start a new AI team.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said initially he’d proposed to remove OpenAI’s board, which fired him, and replace it with four members, including himself. Altman was not made a board member at that time, but Molo said that he had proposed the three members who were ultimately selected — Bret Taylor, Larry Summers and Adam D’Angelo — in conversations with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said that he had no power to appoint new board members, but that he did say which configurations he would be “willing” to be rehired into.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Earlier in the day, he characterized his return to OpenAI as running “back into a burning building to try to save it.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Later this week, both Altman and Musk’s legal teams will present their closing arguments. Then the jury and judge will decide which tech leader to believe.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "During a brief cross-examination of Altman, the Tesla CEO’s attorney questioned whether or not Altman was trustworthy.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1778630872,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 22,
"wordCount": 990
},
"headData": {
"title": "Sam Altman Defends Himself From Elon Musk’s Accusations in OpenAI Trial | KQED",
"description": "During a brief cross-examination of Altman, the Tesla CEO’s attorney questioned whether or not Altman was trustworthy.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Sam Altman Defends Himself From Elon Musk’s Accusations in OpenAI Trial",
"datePublished": "2026-05-12T16:41:18-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-05-12T17:07:52-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 248,
"slug": "technology",
"name": "Technology"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12083278",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12083278/sam-altman-defends-himself-from-elon-musks-accusations-in-openai-trial",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>On the stand on Tuesday, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said that Elon Musk tried to \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081916/are-elon-musk-and-openai-fighting-an-ai-arms-race-sam-altmans-lawyers-think-so\">wrest control over the company\u003c/a> they co-founded before the Tesla CEO’s 2018 exit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman’s testimony in the federal trial in Oakland, which many see as a billionaire grudge match, pushed back on Musk’s claim that the powerful AI start-up betrayed its mission to benefit the public good. Musk has accused Altman of \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity\">“stealing a charity” \u003c/a>by building an $850 million for-profit company on the back of its nonprofit research lab.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said that in early discussions about creating a for-profit arm, Musk sought majority ownership, and later proposed folding the nonprofit into his car company.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I read that as a lightweight threat,” Altman said of the plan to bring OpenAI into Tesla. “I don’t think it would have served the mission. I think it would have effectively destroyed the nonprofit in the process.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Mr. Musk did try to kill it, I guess twice,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>As early as summer 2017, Altman, Musk and other OpenAI executives began discussing if and how to launch a for-profit, citing a need to raise more money to keep up with competitors like Google.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12083394\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12083394 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI CEO Sam Altman testifies in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity rather than solely for profit in Oakland on May 12, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Altman said they were “running the organization on a shoestring,” with a short runway of cash. To acquire the compute — or the GPUs and CPUs needed to power AI — and funding they needed to pursue artificial general intelligence, or a superintelligent AI technology known as AGI, the company would need more significant investments, the executives determined.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I thought, of course, we needed to raise billions to quickly ramp,” he said. “I saw no way to do it.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman, Greg Brockman, the president of OpenAI and Ilya Sutskever, a former top OpenAI computer scientist and member of its founding team, have said that in those conversations, Musk repeatedly proposed plans that would give him majority control. Initially, Altman said that he asked for 90% equity in a potential for-profit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The other executives pushed back on this request, including in an email Altman sent to Musk at the time, in which he said, “I am worried about control. I don’t think any one person should have control of the world’s first AGI — in fact, the whole reason we started OpenAI is so that wouldn’t happen.”\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12083224",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/SamAltmanGetty.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>Altman described Musk as “mercurial,” and said that when he left OpenAI in February 2018, after for-profit discussions fell apart, “people wondered if he’d try to take a vengeance on us” — which both he and his attorney, William Savitt, have alleged is exactly what Musk’s lawsuit aims to do.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>During his cross-examination, though, Musk’s counsel Steven Molo seemed to suggest that it is Altman who has amassed significant control over OpenAI since it did launch a for-profit arm in 2019.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo asked Altman about the testimonies of various former OpenAI executives, who said he was untrustworthy and had a history of lying. Altman denied hearing those testimonies, but when asked if he had “repeatedly been called a liar” by people he has done business with, he said, “I have heard people say that.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo said that Altman sits on the board of directors for both the OpenAI Foundation, the nonprofit arm, and OpenAI’s for-profit. He is also the company’s CEO.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Would you ever fire yourself as the CEO of the for-profit?” Molo said, adding that the board of the nonprofit is supposed to provide oversight for the chief officer.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said that CEOs are “almost always” on their company’s boards. When pressed, he said he had “no plans” to fire himself.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12083294\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12083294\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260512-MUSK-ALTMAN-TRIAL-VB-01-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Bret Taylor testifies in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity rather than solely for profit in Oakland on May 12, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Molo also asked Altman about how board members were selected following his brief firing in 2023. During the five-day ouster, there were long negotiations behind the scenes about whether Altman would return, and who would be on the board if he did. Altman, Brockman and other OpenAI executives who followed them out were also in discussions with Microsoft, OpenAI’s largest financial backer, which had offered to bring them on to start a new AI team.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said initially he’d proposed to remove OpenAI’s board, which fired him, and replace it with four members, including himself. Altman was not made a board member at that time, but Molo said that he had proposed the three members who were ultimately selected — Bret Taylor, Larry Summers and Adam D’Angelo — in conversations with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said that he had no power to appoint new board members, but that he did say which configurations he would be “willing” to be rehired into.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Earlier in the day, he characterized his return to OpenAI as running “back into a burning building to try to save it.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Later this week, both Altman and Musk’s legal teams will present their closing arguments. Then the jury and judge will decide which tech leader to believe.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12083278/sam-altman-defends-himself-from-elon-musks-accusations-in-openai-trial",
"authors": [
"11913",
"251"
],
"categories": [
"news_6188",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_248"
],
"tags": [
"news_34755",
"news_1386",
"news_32668",
"news_3897",
"news_27626",
"news_21891",
"news_34054",
"news_33542",
"news_33543",
"news_34586",
"news_1631"
],
"featImg": "news_12083392",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12083224": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12083224",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12083224",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1778546112000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "former-openai-exec-calls-decision-to-remove-sam-altman-a-hail-mary-during-musk-trial",
"title": "Former OpenAI Exec Calls Decision to Remove Sam Altman a ‘Hail Mary’ During Musk Trial",
"publishDate": 1778546112,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Former OpenAI Exec Calls Decision to Remove Sam Altman a ‘Hail Mary’ During Musk Trial | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>Microsoft’s CEO and another major player took the stand on Monday in \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/oakland\">Oakland\u003c/a>, testifying in the blockbuster trial between OpenAI co-founders Elon Musk and Sam Altman.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Ahead of Altman’s testimony, Musk’s attorney Steven Molo questioned Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Ilya Sutskever, a top OpenAI computer scientist who departed the company in 2024. Sutskever discussed his role in orchestrating Altman’s brief ouster in 2023.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Over five days in November 2023, Altman was removed and reinstated from his post, after a coalition of board members raised concerns that he had not been “consistently candid in his communications” and cited a breakdown of trust.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Whether Altman and other executives have maintained OpenAI’s initial stated mission — to develop AI safely and for the “benefit of humanity” — is critical to Musk’s suit, which claims that leaders breached their duty to its nonprofit mission by building a for-profit company on top of it. Musk also alleged that the company unfairly benefited at his expense.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk also alleges that Microsoft, which is OpenAI’s largest financial backer and until this week held the exclusive rights to license and sell its technology, aided and abetted that breach of trust.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo questioned Nadella about Microsoft’s motive to invest in OpenAI — a $13 billion input that Nadella said is expected to see a return of about $92 billion, “if it works out.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081686\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12081686 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Steve Molo, Elon Musk’s attorney, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk (center-right) claims that Sam Altman (right) and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland, on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Musk’s attorney pointed out Nadella’s fiduciary duty to maximize profit, and referenced a series of texts between him and Altman that appeared to show Nadella pushing for an earlier rollout of the paid version of ChatGPT.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“When chatGPT paid?” Nadella wrote in the message.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said that there was “Not enough compute to make it a good consumer experience,” to which Nadella said, “The sooner the better.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Nadella said that the reason Microsoft invested was that OpenAI was pursuing a for-profit model, but he said, “If the pie became larger, the nonprofit would benefit as well.”[aside postID=news_12081916 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-2000x1333.jpg']Molo asked Nadella if he was aware that, for a period of time, OpenAI’s nonprofit did not have any employees.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I am not,” Nadella said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo also questioned Nadella about Microsoft’s role during Altman’s brief ouster. At the time, Nadella announced that he would hire Altman, along with OpenAI’s third co-founder and current president, Greg Brockman, as well as other allies, to head up a new AI team at Microsoft.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Nadella said that he “had ideas about how Sam [Altman] and the other employees could join Microsoft if they were not reinstated.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If people were going to leave OpenAI, I wanted them to come to Microsoft,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo asked Nadella if he knew why Altman had been removed, to which Nadella said he was never given an “explicit answer.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Did the thought occur to you … the board might issue a public statement about why they fired Altman?” Molo said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Nadella said during that period — referred to as “The Blip” by many OpenAI employees — he was focused on ensuring continuity for customers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It goes back to me wanting to communicate to customers that they can count on us,” he said. “Come Monday, that doesn’t just disappear.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12082325\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12082325 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI CEO Sam Altman watches as OpenAI President Greg Brockman testifies in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland, on May 4, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Sutskever, who took the stand after Nadella, described Altman’s removal differently. He said it was a “Hail Mary” to save OpenAI, which had become an environment that was “not conducive” to the technology’s safety.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I felt a great deal of ownership of OpenAI,” he said. “I felt like I created this company. I simply cared for it, and I didn’t want it to be destroyed.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Sutskever, who helped lead the ouster, had compiled a more than 50-page record of Altman’s “consistent pattern of lying,” including misrepresenting facts, safety protocols and company information to the board and executives.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Sutskever maintained that he had worked on a team that aimed to focus on long-term risks as more powerful AI was built.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“The goal of the super alignment is to do the research in advance, such that humanity will have the technological means to make it controlled and safe,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The team was disbanded days after he departed the company, in May 2024.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "The testimonies on Monday centered on Sam Altman’s brief 2023 ousting from OpenAI, as allegations mounted against the tech giant’s conduct and Microsoft’s motives in backing the AI company.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1778547375,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 26,
"wordCount": 890
},
"headData": {
"title": "Former OpenAI Exec Calls Decision to Remove Sam Altman a ‘Hail Mary’ During Musk Trial | KQED",
"description": "The testimonies on Monday centered on Sam Altman’s brief 2023 ousting from OpenAI, as allegations mounted against the tech giant’s conduct and Microsoft’s motives in backing the AI company.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Former OpenAI Exec Calls Decision to Remove Sam Altman a ‘Hail Mary’ During Musk Trial",
"datePublished": "2026-05-11T17:35:12-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-05-11T17:56:15-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 248,
"slug": "technology",
"name": "Technology"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12083224",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12083224/former-openai-exec-calls-decision-to-remove-sam-altman-a-hail-mary-during-musk-trial",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Microsoft’s CEO and another major player took the stand on Monday in \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/oakland\">Oakland\u003c/a>, testifying in the blockbuster trial between OpenAI co-founders Elon Musk and Sam Altman.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Ahead of Altman’s testimony, Musk’s attorney Steven Molo questioned Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Ilya Sutskever, a top OpenAI computer scientist who departed the company in 2024. Sutskever discussed his role in orchestrating Altman’s brief ouster in 2023.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Over five days in November 2023, Altman was removed and reinstated from his post, after a coalition of board members raised concerns that he had not been “consistently candid in his communications” and cited a breakdown of trust.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Whether Altman and other executives have maintained OpenAI’s initial stated mission — to develop AI safely and for the “benefit of humanity” — is critical to Musk’s suit, which claims that leaders breached their duty to its nonprofit mission by building a for-profit company on top of it. Musk also alleged that the company unfairly benefited at his expense.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk also alleges that Microsoft, which is OpenAI’s largest financial backer and until this week held the exclusive rights to license and sell its technology, aided and abetted that breach of trust.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo questioned Nadella about Microsoft’s motive to invest in OpenAI — a $13 billion input that Nadella said is expected to see a return of about $92 billion, “if it works out.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081686\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12081686 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Steve Molo, Elon Musk’s attorney, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk (center-right) claims that Sam Altman (right) and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland, on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Musk’s attorney pointed out Nadella’s fiduciary duty to maximize profit, and referenced a series of texts between him and Altman that appeared to show Nadella pushing for an earlier rollout of the paid version of ChatGPT.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“When chatGPT paid?” Nadella wrote in the message.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman said that there was “Not enough compute to make it a good consumer experience,” to which Nadella said, “The sooner the better.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Nadella said that the reason Microsoft invested was that OpenAI was pursuing a for-profit model, but he said, “If the pie became larger, the nonprofit would benefit as well.”\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12081916",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-2000x1333.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>Molo asked Nadella if he was aware that, for a period of time, OpenAI’s nonprofit did not have any employees.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I am not,” Nadella said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo also questioned Nadella about Microsoft’s role during Altman’s brief ouster. At the time, Nadella announced that he would hire Altman, along with OpenAI’s third co-founder and current president, Greg Brockman, as well as other allies, to head up a new AI team at Microsoft.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Nadella said that he “had ideas about how Sam [Altman] and the other employees could join Microsoft if they were not reinstated.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If people were going to leave OpenAI, I wanted them to come to Microsoft,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Molo asked Nadella if he knew why Altman had been removed, to which Nadella said he was never given an “explicit answer.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Did the thought occur to you … the board might issue a public statement about why they fired Altman?” Molo said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Nadella said during that period — referred to as “The Blip” by many OpenAI employees — he was focused on ensuring continuity for customers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It goes back to me wanting to communicate to customers that they can count on us,” he said. “Come Monday, that doesn’t just disappear.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12082325\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12082325 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/260504-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI CEO Sam Altman watches as OpenAI President Greg Brockman testifies in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland, on May 4, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Sutskever, who took the stand after Nadella, described Altman’s removal differently. He said it was a “Hail Mary” to save OpenAI, which had become an environment that was “not conducive” to the technology’s safety.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I felt a great deal of ownership of OpenAI,” he said. “I felt like I created this company. I simply cared for it, and I didn’t want it to be destroyed.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Sutskever, who helped lead the ouster, had compiled a more than 50-page record of Altman’s “consistent pattern of lying,” including misrepresenting facts, safety protocols and company information to the board and executives.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Sutskever maintained that he had worked on a team that aimed to focus on long-term risks as more powerful AI was built.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“The goal of the super alignment is to do the research in advance, such that humanity will have the technological means to make it controlled and safe,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The team was disbanded days after he departed the company, in May 2024.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12083224/former-openai-exec-calls-decision-to-remove-sam-altman-a-hail-mary-during-musk-trial",
"authors": [
"11913",
"251"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_6188",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_248"
],
"tags": [
"news_34755",
"news_1386",
"news_32668",
"news_3897",
"news_27626",
"news_19954",
"news_21891",
"news_34054",
"news_33542",
"news_33543",
"news_34586",
"news_1631"
],
"featImg": "news_12083235",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12082064": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12082064",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12082064",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1777676594000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "openai-back-in-court-over-canada-school-shooters-use-of-chatgpt",
"title": "OpenAI Back in Court Over Canada School Shooter’s Use of ChatGPT",
"publishDate": 1777676594,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "OpenAI Back in Court Over Canada School Shooter’s Use of ChatGPT | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>The families of victims of a school shooting in a British Columbia town sued artificial intelligence company \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/open-ai\">OpenAI \u003c/a>in a San Francisco court this week, alleging that the company behind \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/chatgpt\">ChatGPT\u003c/a> failed to alert police of the shooter’s alarming interactions with the chatbot.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>One of the lawsuits was filed on behalf of Shannda Aviugana-Durand, an education assistant who was shot and killed in a library at \u003ca href=\"https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BU49CY30r0KCfBs0NJuk5S0KJ2E5VEuIF2IpxdwviIo/edit?tab=t.0\">Tumbler Ridge Secondary School\u003c/a>. The suit alleges negligence, aiding and abetting a mass shooting, wrongful death and liability, among other claims. According to the lawsuit, Aviugana-Durand’s daughter was present at the time of the attack.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The educational assistant was one of six people who were killed by an 18-year-old in February. The teen — who later shot herself — also killed her mother and her 11-year-old half-brother at home beforehand. Twenty-five people were also injured in the attack, Canada’s deadliest mass shooting in years.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Another lawsuit was filed Wednesday on behalf of 12-year-old Maya Gebala, who was critically injured in the February shooting. The plaintiffs’ attorney, Jay Edelson, said in an interview with the \u003cem>Associated Press\u003c/em> that decisions made by OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman “have destroyed the town. The people are really resilient, but what happened is unimaginable.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman sent a letter last week \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/openai-altman-tumbler-ridge-killings-apology-dec2adaad3946583519370eede6a99e2\">formally apologizing\u003c/a> to the community that his company did not notify law enforcement about the shooter’s online behavior in the weeks leading up to the attack.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The case highlights concerns about the harms posed by \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/ai-sycophancy-chatbots-science-study-8dc61e69278b661cab1e53d38b4173b6\">overly agreeable AI chatbots\u003c/a> and what obligations the tech industry has to control them or notify authorities about planned violence by chatbot users. This month, \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/missing-grad-students-florida-6279adeef3d0540865de39ab3d6f8093\">prosecutors investigating the deaths\u003c/a> of two University of South Florida doctoral students said that the suspect asked ChatGPT about body disposal in the lead-up to the students’ disappearance.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12079761\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12079761 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/SamAltmanGetty2.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/SamAltmanGetty2.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/SamAltmanGetty2-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/SamAltmanGetty2-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI CEO Sam Altman speaks during the BlackRock Infrastructure Summit on March 11, 2026, in Washington, D.C. \u003ccite>(Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“It’s not the first lawsuit of its kind,” said Robin Feldman, law professor at UC Law San Francisco and director of its AI Law and Innovation Institute. “This is part of an early wave of lawsuits in which citizens are asking to hold LLMs responsible for harms that happen down the line, whether they are crimes, mental health problems, suicide.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“ChatGPT was first on the scene. And it is the most widely known of the LLMs,” Feldman said. “That puts it in the hot seat as the law tries to understand how to wrangle this unusual beast.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In response to the lawsuit, OpenAI said in a written statement that the “events in Tumbler Ridge are a tragedy. We have a zero-tolerance policy for using our tools to assist in committing violence.”[aside postID=news_12081916 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-2000x1333.jpg']“As we shared with Canadian officials, we have already strengthened our safeguards, including improving how ChatGPT responds to signs of distress, connecting people with local support and mental health resources, strengthening how we assess and escalate potential threats of violence, and improving detection of repeat policy violators,” the company said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Edelson, a Chicago-based lawyer known for taking on the tech industry, is already juggling a number of high-profile cases against OpenAI, including from the family of a California teenager who killed himself after \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/ai-chatbot-teens-congress-chatgpt-character-ce3959b6a3ea1a4997bf1ccabb4f0de2\">conversations with ChatGPT\u003c/a> and another from the heirs of an 83-year-old Connecticut woman \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/ai-chatgpt-wrongful-death-lawsuit-greenwich-97fd7da31c0fa08f3d3ea9efd6713151\">killed by her son\u003c/a> after ChatGPT allegedly amplified the man’s “paranoid delusions.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This is not a passive technology,” Edelson said, comparing the chatbot interactions with a more conventional online search for information. “What we’ve seen in the past is that (for) people who are mentally ill, the chatbot will validate what they’re saying and then amplify what they’re saying.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Last week, Edelson visited the small town of Tumbler Ridge and met with dozens of people in the basement of a visitor center. He also visited Gebala at a children’s hospital in Vancouver, where she remains hospitalized and seemed alert but unable to speak.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It was so heartbreaking,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12082198\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12082198 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty2.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty2.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty2-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty2-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Candles, flowers, photographs, plush toys and other items at a makeshift memorial for the victims four days after a deadly mass shooting took place at a school, in the town of Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, Canada, on Feb. 13, 2026. \u003ccite>(Paige Taylor White/AFP via Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The lawsuits filed Wednesday also represent the families of the five slain children targeted in the school shooting: Zoey Benoit, Abel Mwansa Jr., Ticaria “Tiki” Lampert and Kylie Smith, all 12, and Ezekiel Schofield, 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After the shootings, OpenAI came forward to say that last June, the company flagged the shooter’s account as having been used to discuss violence against other people.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The company said it considered whether to refer the account to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, but determined at the time that the account activity didn’t meet a threshold for referral to law enforcement. OpenAI banned the account in June for violating its usage policy.[aside postID=news_12080610 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/06/GettyImages-2155035557-1020x680.jpg']The lawsuits filed Wednesday allege “the victims didn’t learn this because OpenAI was forthcoming, but because \u003ca href=\"https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/openai-employees-raised-alarms-about-canada-shooting-suspect-months-ago-b585df62\">its own employees leaked it to \u003cem>The Wall Street Journal\u003c/em>\u003c/a> after they could no longer stomach the company’s silence.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In \u003ca href=\"https://tumblerridgelines.com/2026/04/24/openai-apologizes-to-tumbler-ridge/\">his letter\u003c/a>, Altman said he was “deeply sorry that we did not alert law enforcement to the account that was banned in June.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“While I know words can never be enough, I believe an apology is necessary to recognize the harm and irreversible loss your community has suffered,” Altman wrote.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>British Columbia Premier David Eby, \u003ca href=\"https://x.com/dave_eby/status/2047751590803886291?s=46&t=7BBzFwo6eYLzJIVfAlumEQ\">in a social media post\u003c/a>, called the apology “necessary, and yet grossly insufficient for the devastation done to the families of Tumbler Ridge.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Gebala lawsuit accuses OpenAI of negligence involving a failure to warn law enforcement and “aiding and abetting a mass shooting.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Along with damages, the Gebala lawsuit seeks a court order that would require OpenAI to ban users from ChatGPT if their accounts were deactivated for violent misuse, and to require the company to alert law enforcement when its systems identify someone who poses a “real-world risk of violence.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>An earlier case was filed in a court in British Columbia, but a team of lawyers in both countries is seeking to bring the affiliated cases to San Francisco, where OpenAI is headquartered.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>‘Untried territory’\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Feldman called reports that the company flagged the risk but failed to act effectively “deeply troubling.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“As with so much about AI, the lawsuit will take us into untried territory,” she said. “The old doctrines are being applied to new circumstances.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She said if the families were to win, the company would have to pay damages and assume responsibility for altering its platform to identify and respond to risks.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The major issues that the lawsuit will tackle are whether OpenAI and ChatGPT are protected by the First Amendment and whether or not OpenAI had “a duty to act,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12082201\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12082201 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty3.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty3.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty3-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty3-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Community members attend a vigil to honor the victims of one of Canada’s deadliest mass shootings in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, Canada, on Feb. 13, 2026. \u003ccite>(Paige Taylor White/AFP via Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>She said that there are \u003ca href=\"https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46751\">parts\u003c/a> of U.S. law that shield tech companies from liability for content that their users host. Essentially, this means platforms are more like “bulletin boards” and “are not responsible for the content.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But this case would raise the question, she said, “Are LLMs like a bulletin board or publisher? Or they like a facilitator who helped with the crime?”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Some companies struggle with the burden of responsibility when reviewing potential threats to public safety, Feldman said, “If they try to help out, they can be viewed as accepting the mantle of responsibility.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to Feldman, families are also likely to argue that the LLM “is a defective product without appropriate safeguards.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“In that case, the question is the following: ‘Is the LLM a defective product, or merely a product that was used improperly? And is it analogous to a product at all?”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“All of these are tough questions as we enter the age of AI, and the courts are just beginning to explore them,” Feldman said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>The Associated Press’ Jim Morris contributed to this story.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "The lawsuit alleges negligence and wrongful death on account of the shooter’s interactions with the chatbot in the weeks and months leading up to the fatal attack.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1777678175,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 35,
"wordCount": 1495
},
"headData": {
"title": "OpenAI Back in Court Over Canada School Shooter’s Use of ChatGPT | KQED",
"description": "The lawsuit alleges negligence and wrongful death on account of the shooter’s interactions with the chatbot in the weeks and months leading up to the fatal attack.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "OpenAI Back in Court Over Canada School Shooter’s Use of ChatGPT",
"datePublished": "2026-05-01T16:03:14-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-05-01T16:29:35-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 34167,
"slug": "criminal-justice",
"name": "Criminal Justice"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprByline": "Matt O’Brien, Associated Press, and Nisa Khan, KQED",
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12082064",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"showOnAuthorArchivePages": "Yes",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12082064/openai-back-in-court-over-canada-school-shooters-use-of-chatgpt",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>The families of victims of a school shooting in a British Columbia town sued artificial intelligence company \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/open-ai\">OpenAI \u003c/a>in a San Francisco court this week, alleging that the company behind \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/chatgpt\">ChatGPT\u003c/a> failed to alert police of the shooter’s alarming interactions with the chatbot.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>One of the lawsuits was filed on behalf of Shannda Aviugana-Durand, an education assistant who was shot and killed in a library at \u003ca href=\"https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BU49CY30r0KCfBs0NJuk5S0KJ2E5VEuIF2IpxdwviIo/edit?tab=t.0\">Tumbler Ridge Secondary School\u003c/a>. The suit alleges negligence, aiding and abetting a mass shooting, wrongful death and liability, among other claims. According to the lawsuit, Aviugana-Durand’s daughter was present at the time of the attack.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The educational assistant was one of six people who were killed by an 18-year-old in February. The teen — who later shot herself — also killed her mother and her 11-year-old half-brother at home beforehand. Twenty-five people were also injured in the attack, Canada’s deadliest mass shooting in years.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Another lawsuit was filed Wednesday on behalf of 12-year-old Maya Gebala, who was critically injured in the February shooting. The plaintiffs’ attorney, Jay Edelson, said in an interview with the \u003cem>Associated Press\u003c/em> that decisions made by OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman “have destroyed the town. The people are really resilient, but what happened is unimaginable.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Altman sent a letter last week \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/openai-altman-tumbler-ridge-killings-apology-dec2adaad3946583519370eede6a99e2\">formally apologizing\u003c/a> to the community that his company did not notify law enforcement about the shooter’s online behavior in the weeks leading up to the attack.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The case highlights concerns about the harms posed by \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/ai-sycophancy-chatbots-science-study-8dc61e69278b661cab1e53d38b4173b6\">overly agreeable AI chatbots\u003c/a> and what obligations the tech industry has to control them or notify authorities about planned violence by chatbot users. This month, \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/missing-grad-students-florida-6279adeef3d0540865de39ab3d6f8093\">prosecutors investigating the deaths\u003c/a> of two University of South Florida doctoral students said that the suspect asked ChatGPT about body disposal in the lead-up to the students’ disappearance.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12079761\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12079761 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/SamAltmanGetty2.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/SamAltmanGetty2.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/SamAltmanGetty2-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/SamAltmanGetty2-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI CEO Sam Altman speaks during the BlackRock Infrastructure Summit on March 11, 2026, in Washington, D.C. \u003ccite>(Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“It’s not the first lawsuit of its kind,” said Robin Feldman, law professor at UC Law San Francisco and director of its AI Law and Innovation Institute. “This is part of an early wave of lawsuits in which citizens are asking to hold LLMs responsible for harms that happen down the line, whether they are crimes, mental health problems, suicide.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“ChatGPT was first on the scene. And it is the most widely known of the LLMs,” Feldman said. “That puts it in the hot seat as the law tries to understand how to wrangle this unusual beast.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In response to the lawsuit, OpenAI said in a written statement that the “events in Tumbler Ridge are a tragedy. We have a zero-tolerance policy for using our tools to assist in committing violence.”\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12081916",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/AP26118555622828-2000x1333.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>“As we shared with Canadian officials, we have already strengthened our safeguards, including improving how ChatGPT responds to signs of distress, connecting people with local support and mental health resources, strengthening how we assess and escalate potential threats of violence, and improving detection of repeat policy violators,” the company said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Edelson, a Chicago-based lawyer known for taking on the tech industry, is already juggling a number of high-profile cases against OpenAI, including from the family of a California teenager who killed himself after \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/ai-chatbot-teens-congress-chatgpt-character-ce3959b6a3ea1a4997bf1ccabb4f0de2\">conversations with ChatGPT\u003c/a> and another from the heirs of an 83-year-old Connecticut woman \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/ai-chatgpt-wrongful-death-lawsuit-greenwich-97fd7da31c0fa08f3d3ea9efd6713151\">killed by her son\u003c/a> after ChatGPT allegedly amplified the man’s “paranoid delusions.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This is not a passive technology,” Edelson said, comparing the chatbot interactions with a more conventional online search for information. “What we’ve seen in the past is that (for) people who are mentally ill, the chatbot will validate what they’re saying and then amplify what they’re saying.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Last week, Edelson visited the small town of Tumbler Ridge and met with dozens of people in the basement of a visitor center. He also visited Gebala at a children’s hospital in Vancouver, where she remains hospitalized and seemed alert but unable to speak.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It was so heartbreaking,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12082198\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12082198 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty2.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty2.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty2-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty2-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Candles, flowers, photographs, plush toys and other items at a makeshift memorial for the victims four days after a deadly mass shooting took place at a school, in the town of Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, Canada, on Feb. 13, 2026. \u003ccite>(Paige Taylor White/AFP via Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The lawsuits filed Wednesday also represent the families of the five slain children targeted in the school shooting: Zoey Benoit, Abel Mwansa Jr., Ticaria “Tiki” Lampert and Kylie Smith, all 12, and Ezekiel Schofield, 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After the shootings, OpenAI came forward to say that last June, the company flagged the shooter’s account as having been used to discuss violence against other people.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The company said it considered whether to refer the account to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, but determined at the time that the account activity didn’t meet a threshold for referral to law enforcement. OpenAI banned the account in June for violating its usage policy.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12080610",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/06/GettyImages-2155035557-1020x680.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>The lawsuits filed Wednesday allege “the victims didn’t learn this because OpenAI was forthcoming, but because \u003ca href=\"https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/openai-employees-raised-alarms-about-canada-shooting-suspect-months-ago-b585df62\">its own employees leaked it to \u003cem>The Wall Street Journal\u003c/em>\u003c/a> after they could no longer stomach the company’s silence.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In \u003ca href=\"https://tumblerridgelines.com/2026/04/24/openai-apologizes-to-tumbler-ridge/\">his letter\u003c/a>, Altman said he was “deeply sorry that we did not alert law enforcement to the account that was banned in June.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“While I know words can never be enough, I believe an apology is necessary to recognize the harm and irreversible loss your community has suffered,” Altman wrote.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>British Columbia Premier David Eby, \u003ca href=\"https://x.com/dave_eby/status/2047751590803886291?s=46&t=7BBzFwo6eYLzJIVfAlumEQ\">in a social media post\u003c/a>, called the apology “necessary, and yet grossly insufficient for the devastation done to the families of Tumbler Ridge.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Gebala lawsuit accuses OpenAI of negligence involving a failure to warn law enforcement and “aiding and abetting a mass shooting.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Along with damages, the Gebala lawsuit seeks a court order that would require OpenAI to ban users from ChatGPT if their accounts were deactivated for violent misuse, and to require the company to alert law enforcement when its systems identify someone who poses a “real-world risk of violence.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>An earlier case was filed in a court in British Columbia, but a team of lawyers in both countries is seeking to bring the affiliated cases to San Francisco, where OpenAI is headquartered.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>‘Untried territory’\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Feldman called reports that the company flagged the risk but failed to act effectively “deeply troubling.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“As with so much about AI, the lawsuit will take us into untried territory,” she said. “The old doctrines are being applied to new circumstances.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She said if the families were to win, the company would have to pay damages and assume responsibility for altering its platform to identify and respond to risks.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The major issues that the lawsuit will tackle are whether OpenAI and ChatGPT are protected by the First Amendment and whether or not OpenAI had “a duty to act,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12082201\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-12082201 size-full\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty3.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty3.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty3-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/TumblerRidgeGetty3-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Community members attend a vigil to honor the victims of one of Canada’s deadliest mass shootings in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, Canada, on Feb. 13, 2026. \u003ccite>(Paige Taylor White/AFP via Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>She said that there are \u003ca href=\"https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46751\">parts\u003c/a> of U.S. law that shield tech companies from liability for content that their users host. Essentially, this means platforms are more like “bulletin boards” and “are not responsible for the content.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But this case would raise the question, she said, “Are LLMs like a bulletin board or publisher? Or they like a facilitator who helped with the crime?”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Some companies struggle with the burden of responsibility when reviewing potential threats to public safety, Feldman said, “If they try to help out, they can be viewed as accepting the mantle of responsibility.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to Feldman, families are also likely to argue that the LLM “is a defective product without appropriate safeguards.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“In that case, the question is the following: ‘Is the LLM a defective product, or merely a product that was used improperly? And is it analogous to a product at all?”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“All of these are tough questions as we enter the age of AI, and the courts are just beginning to explore them,” Feldman said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>The Associated Press’ Jim Morris contributed to this story.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12082064/openai-back-in-court-over-canada-school-shooters-use-of-chatgpt",
"authors": [
"byline_news_12082064"
],
"categories": [
"news_34167",
"news_28250",
"news_8"
],
"tags": [
"news_34755",
"news_1386",
"news_32668",
"news_17725",
"news_22434",
"news_35784",
"news_33542",
"news_33543",
"news_38"
],
"featImg": "news_12082068",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12081916": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12081916",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12081916",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1777591777000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "are-elon-musk-and-openai-fighting-an-ai-arms-race-sam-altmans-lawyers-think-so",
"title": "Are Elon Musk and OpenAI Fighting an AI Arms Race? Sam Altman’s Lawyers Think So",
"publishDate": 1777591777,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Are Elon Musk and OpenAI Fighting an AI Arms Race? Sam Altman’s Lawyers Think So | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>As Elon Musk’s dayslong testimony in his \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081290/how-to-unscramble-an-omelet-in-silicon-valley-the-musk-v-altman-trial-that-will-try\">case against OpenAI co-founder Sam Altman\u003c/a> came to a close Thursday, defense attorneys aimed to paint the world’s richest man as intent on dominating artificial intelligence — not on protecting the world from it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under cross-examination in an Oakland court, attorneys for Altman and Microsoft, the company’s largest financial backer and which until this week held the exclusive rights to license and sell its technology, held Musk’s feet to the fire about a number of business moves he’s made — both within and outside of OpenAI — that might give jurors pause about whether he operated so differently from his former colleagues in the race to dominate the field.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>During hours of testimony, Musk has told the court that he cofounded the nonprofit OpenAI with Altman and OpenAI President Greg Brockman\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity\"> in 2015 altruistically\u003c/a>, fearing the dangers of AI and wanting to ensure that the technology was developed in a safe and open-source way. He brought the suit, he said, after deciding that his co-founders \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081798/elon-musk-says-sam-altman-tricked-him-into-funding-openai\">had betrayed that intention\u003c/a> — expanding the company into a tech behemoth valued at $852 billion today.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But Microsoft attorney Russell Cohen seemed to point to a different motivation: a desire to beat OpenAI and win the AI race.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“You didn’t sue Microsoft [and OpenAI] until November 2024, correct?” Cohen said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Yes,” Musk said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“And that is after you formed your own AI company, xAI, correct?” Cohen said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Yes,” Musk said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081637\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081637\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI’s lead counsel William Savitt presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The questions came after William Savitt, Altman’s attorney, directed the jury’s attention to a bombshell message Musk sent to Mark Zuckerberg in February 2025, asking whether the Meta CEO would be “open to the idea of bidding on the OpenAI IP,” or intellectual property, with Musk and others.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The jury also learned that xAI had partially “distilled,” that is, derived technology from OpenAI’s own models, which violates OpenAI’s terms of service.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The pointed inquiries on Thursday came after Musk’s testimony started to bring the events of how OpenAI launched its first for-profit subsidiary into focus. In 2017, executives including Altman, Musk, Brockman and Ilya Sutskever, a top computer scientist at the company since its founding, launched discussions about creating a for-profit subsidiary.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>It would be, they said, a way to bring in additional funding and keep at the cutting edge of a growing field of competitors as they started pursuing artificial general intelligence — commonly referred to as AGI — a futuristic superintelligent AI technology.[aside postID=news_12081798 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1.jpg']Altman’s defense has alleged that throughout that process, Musk attempted to “wrest control” of the company twice, first insisting that he hold a majority equity stake in any for-profit entity, control its board of directors and serve as CEO, and later, that OpenAI be folded into Tesla, where he already serves as CEO.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt said Musk began withholding $5 million quarterly fund contributions to put pressure on the company to grant his requests, and after those attempts failed, he left the company.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt also accused Musk of poaching OpenAI employees as Musk exited in early 2018, including founding member Andrej Karpathy, for Tesla.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk said multiple times that Tesla is not pursuing AGI. But in March, Musk \u003ca href=\"https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2029123591871308272?lang=en\">wrote on the social media platform X\u003c/a> that “Tesla will be one of the companies to make AGI and probably the first to make it in humanoid/atom-shaping form.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Separately, he formed xAI in 2023, which he said is pursuing AGI.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He’s downplayed its competitiveness with OpenAI, though, testifying that it has just a couple hundred employees and a “small market share.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I would say technically competitive, but much smaller than OpenAI,” Musk said Tuesday.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_10734536\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 1920px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-10734536\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell.jpg\" alt='Stuart Russell, UC Berkeley computer science professor and co-author of the standard textbook \"Artificial Intelligence: a Modern Approach.\"' width=\"1920\" height=\"1320\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-400x275.jpg 400w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-800x550.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-1440x990.jpg 1440w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-1180x811.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-960x660.jpg 960w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1920px) 100vw, 1920px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Stuart Russell, UC Berkeley computer science professor and co-author of the standard textbook “Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach.” \u003ccite>(Juan Mabromata/AFP via Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The three days of Musk’s testimony got testy at times, particularly during Savitt’s cross-examination on Wednesday afternoon, when Savitt and U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers asked Musk repeatedly to answer the questions he was asked. Musk accused Savitt of intentionally misleading him.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But the most heated moment thus far might have come before the jury was called to the courtroom on Thursday morning, during a discussion about what AI safety expert Stuart Russell, who is taking the stand this afternoon, will be willing to testify to.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s attorney argued he should be allowed to speak about the climate risk associated with AI, saying: “We could all die.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It is also ironic that your client, despite these risks, is creating a company in the exact space,” Gonzalez Rogers said. “I suspect that there are people who don’t want to put the future in Mr. Musk’s hands.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "The Tesla CEO said OpenAI betrayed its original mission as a nonprofit. But defense attorneys representing Altman and Microsoft used social media and email evidence to question Musk's own motives for getting involved. ",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1777653621,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 24,
"wordCount": 920
},
"headData": {
"title": "Are Elon Musk and OpenAI Fighting an AI Arms Race? Sam Altman’s Lawyers Think So | KQED",
"description": "The Tesla CEO said OpenAI betrayed its original mission as a nonprofit. But defense attorneys representing Altman and Microsoft used social media and email evidence to question Musk's own motives for getting involved. ",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Are Elon Musk and OpenAI Fighting an AI Arms Race? Sam Altman’s Lawyers Think So",
"datePublished": "2026-04-30T16:29:37-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-05-01T09:40:21-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 248,
"slug": "technology",
"name": "Technology"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12081916",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12081916/are-elon-musk-and-openai-fighting-an-ai-arms-race-sam-altmans-lawyers-think-so",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>As Elon Musk’s dayslong testimony in his \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081290/how-to-unscramble-an-omelet-in-silicon-valley-the-musk-v-altman-trial-that-will-try\">case against OpenAI co-founder Sam Altman\u003c/a> came to a close Thursday, defense attorneys aimed to paint the world’s richest man as intent on dominating artificial intelligence — not on protecting the world from it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under cross-examination in an Oakland court, attorneys for Altman and Microsoft, the company’s largest financial backer and which until this week held the exclusive rights to license and sell its technology, held Musk’s feet to the fire about a number of business moves he’s made — both within and outside of OpenAI — that might give jurors pause about whether he operated so differently from his former colleagues in the race to dominate the field.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>During hours of testimony, Musk has told the court that he cofounded the nonprofit OpenAI with Altman and OpenAI President Greg Brockman\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity\"> in 2015 altruistically\u003c/a>, fearing the dangers of AI and wanting to ensure that the technology was developed in a safe and open-source way. He brought the suit, he said, after deciding that his co-founders \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081798/elon-musk-says-sam-altman-tricked-him-into-funding-openai\">had betrayed that intention\u003c/a> — expanding the company into a tech behemoth valued at $852 billion today.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But Microsoft attorney Russell Cohen seemed to point to a different motivation: a desire to beat OpenAI and win the AI race.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“You didn’t sue Microsoft [and OpenAI] until November 2024, correct?” Cohen said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Yes,” Musk said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“And that is after you formed your own AI company, xAI, correct?” Cohen said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Yes,” Musk said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081637\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081637\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI’s lead counsel William Savitt presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The questions came after William Savitt, Altman’s attorney, directed the jury’s attention to a bombshell message Musk sent to Mark Zuckerberg in February 2025, asking whether the Meta CEO would be “open to the idea of bidding on the OpenAI IP,” or intellectual property, with Musk and others.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The jury also learned that xAI had partially “distilled,” that is, derived technology from OpenAI’s own models, which violates OpenAI’s terms of service.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The pointed inquiries on Thursday came after Musk’s testimony started to bring the events of how OpenAI launched its first for-profit subsidiary into focus. In 2017, executives including Altman, Musk, Brockman and Ilya Sutskever, a top computer scientist at the company since its founding, launched discussions about creating a for-profit subsidiary.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>It would be, they said, a way to bring in additional funding and keep at the cutting edge of a growing field of competitors as they started pursuing artificial general intelligence — commonly referred to as AGI — a futuristic superintelligent AI technology.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12081798",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>Altman’s defense has alleged that throughout that process, Musk attempted to “wrest control” of the company twice, first insisting that he hold a majority equity stake in any for-profit entity, control its board of directors and serve as CEO, and later, that OpenAI be folded into Tesla, where he already serves as CEO.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt said Musk began withholding $5 million quarterly fund contributions to put pressure on the company to grant his requests, and after those attempts failed, he left the company.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt also accused Musk of poaching OpenAI employees as Musk exited in early 2018, including founding member Andrej Karpathy, for Tesla.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk said multiple times that Tesla is not pursuing AGI. But in March, Musk \u003ca href=\"https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2029123591871308272?lang=en\">wrote on the social media platform X\u003c/a> that “Tesla will be one of the companies to make AGI and probably the first to make it in humanoid/atom-shaping form.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Separately, he formed xAI in 2023, which he said is pursuing AGI.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He’s downplayed its competitiveness with OpenAI, though, testifying that it has just a couple hundred employees and a “small market share.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I would say technically competitive, but much smaller than OpenAI,” Musk said Tuesday.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_10734536\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 1920px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-10734536\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell.jpg\" alt='Stuart Russell, UC Berkeley computer science professor and co-author of the standard textbook \"Artificial Intelligence: a Modern Approach.\"' width=\"1920\" height=\"1320\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-400x275.jpg 400w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-800x550.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-1440x990.jpg 1440w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-1180x811.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/10/StuartRussell-960x660.jpg 960w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1920px) 100vw, 1920px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Stuart Russell, UC Berkeley computer science professor and co-author of the standard textbook “Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach.” \u003ccite>(Juan Mabromata/AFP via Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The three days of Musk’s testimony got testy at times, particularly during Savitt’s cross-examination on Wednesday afternoon, when Savitt and U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers asked Musk repeatedly to answer the questions he was asked. Musk accused Savitt of intentionally misleading him.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But the most heated moment thus far might have come before the jury was called to the courtroom on Thursday morning, during a discussion about what AI safety expert Stuart Russell, who is taking the stand this afternoon, will be willing to testify to.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s attorney argued he should be allowed to speak about the climate risk associated with AI, saying: “We could all die.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It is also ironic that your client, despite these risks, is creating a company in the exact space,” Gonzalez Rogers said. “I suspect that there are people who don’t want to put the future in Mr. Musk’s hands.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12081916/are-elon-musk-and-openai-fighting-an-ai-arms-race-sam-altmans-lawyers-think-so",
"authors": [
"11913",
"251"
],
"categories": [
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_248"
],
"tags": [
"news_1386",
"news_3897",
"news_27626",
"news_34054",
"news_33542",
"news_33543",
"news_34586",
"news_1631"
],
"featImg": "news_12081606",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12081798": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12081798",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12081798",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1777507270000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "elon-musk-says-sam-altman-tricked-him-into-funding-openai",
"title": "Elon Musk Says Sam Altman Tricked Him Into Funding OpenAI",
"publishDate": 1777507270,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Elon Musk Says Sam Altman Tricked Him Into Funding OpenAI | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>During the second day of the \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity\">landmark trial between Sam Altman and Elon Musk\u003c/a>, the Tesla founder told the Oakland courthouse that he was a “fool” to fund OpenAI through its early years.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Testifying in the lawsuit he brought against Altman, which claims the company’s creators betrayed their mission for profits, Musk suggested Wednesday that Altman and cofounder Greg Brockman wanted to “have your cake and eat it too.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If you go nonprofit, you’ve got a sort of moral high ground,” he testified.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s testimony tells one version of founding OpenAI: that he, fearing the dangers of artificial intelligence, pursued its development with the goal of benefiting the common good, alongside, he thought, like-minded collaborators. But behind the scenes, those cofounders engaged in a “long con” to profit at his expense.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“What they really wanted was a for-profit, where they could make as much money as possible,” Musk said later.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Whether the jury believes him will be integral to the decision they’re tasked with making, as they determine whether OpenAI breached charitable trust and engaged in unjust enrichment as it evolved from a nonprofit organization to its current $730 billion iteration.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under cross-examination, Altman’s attorney, William Savitt, questioned Musk’s story and credibility as an altruistic benefactor. He pointed to an email Musk sent to Altman in 2015, which said it would be “probably better” if OpenAI operated as a for-profit company with a parallel nonprofit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081637\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081637\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI’s lead counsel, William Savitt, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>In another email sent to colleagues at his neurotechnology company, Neuralink, Musk said that Google’s AI development was moving very fast, and that he was concerned OpenAI was not on the path to catch up.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Setting it up as a nonprofit might, in hindsight, have been the wrong move,” Musk wrote. “Sense of urgency is not as high.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt asked if, in 2017, Musk suggested at a party that OpenAI should create a for-profit. He said it was just after the company’s AI model had beaten \u003cem>Defense of the Ancients, \u003c/em>a battle video game, which was a pivotal moment in the development process.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk said he didn’t remember giving instructions to create a for-profit at the time.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This was nine years ago,” he said.[aside postID=news_12081603 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED.jpg']Savitt said Tuesday that in 2017, OpenAI executives, including Musk, were in the midst of conversations about whether and how to transition the company to a for-profit structure.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to OpenAI’s court filings, as early as summer 2017, Musk had insisted on holding a majority equity stake in any for-profit entity, serving as CEO and controlling its board of directors.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Pressed by Savitt about what Musk meant by “expressing what you said about control,” the Tesla founder and billionaire said: “I try to be as literal as possible.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In the fall of 2017, Brockman and Ilya Sutskever, another top OpenAI executive, emailed Musk with concerns about the for-profit structure he proposed. Shortly thereafter, discussions over the structure collapsed, and Musk stopped making significant quarterly funding contributions, OpenAI alleges.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He left the company less than six months later.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt framed the breakdown and Musk’s exit as a result of his not getting control of the for-profit, and the other executives’ focus on maintaining its philanthropic mission. He suggested that Musk tried to pressure them to accept his terms by pausing the majority of his financial backing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“You knew that would create financial pressure for the organization,” Savitt said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081686\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081686\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Steve Molo, Elon Musk’s attorney, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk (center-right) claims that Sam Altman (right) and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Musk denied that was his intention. Instead, he alleged that Altman convinced Brockman and the others to go against his proposal, and that their concern over his desire for control was disingenuous.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I’m not going to fund something if I don’t have confidence in the people,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When asked whether he proposed that OpenAI be folded into Tesla, Musk said: “There were a lot of ideas that were brainstormed at the time.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In an email, he wrote that doing so would be the “only path that could even hope to hold a candle to Google.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk said he left OpenAI in February 2018 because he was focused on Tesla’s survival, and believed that OpenAI intended to continue operating as a nonprofit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt also laid out a series of exchanges between Musk and Altman, in which the OpenAI CEO kept him apprised of the company’s corporate structure. He said in March 2018, Musk responded to an email that noted the creation of a for-profit entity of OpenAI with “OK by me,” and was sent a term sheet for OpenAI LP that summer.[aside postID=news_12081290 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260422-ALTMANMUSK-MD-01-KQED.jpg']Savitt also said Altman emailed Musk a draft of the company’s public announcement of its for-profit arm in March 2019, and texted him asking if he had time to talk about Microsoft’s plan to invest in OpenAI. Musk never responded to that text, according to Savitt.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk said he was busy with his other companies in 2018, and while he was aware that it had added a for-profit entity, he hadn’t lost complete faith in the company. While he’d suspended quarterly $5 million funding contributions prior to his departure, he continued to make some contributions until 2020.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He said that he’d gone from enthusiastically supportive to uncertain about OpenAI’s mission, but that he’d fully suspended his contributions when he felt that the company was “deliberately not a nonprofit.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When asked why he waited until 2024 to bring the suit, Musk said that’s when he determined OpenAI breached charitable trust.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Thinking that someone might steal your car is not the same as [if] someone has stolen your car,” Musk said. He said after enlisting his attorney, Alex Spiro, to investigate, he heard from him in 2023 that “the car had been stolen.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I would have sued sooner if I thought the charity had been stolen sooner,” Musk continued.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The trial and Musk’s testimony are expected to continue on Thursday.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "On the second day of a trial pitting the Tesla founder against OpenAI, Elon Musk said he was a “fool” to support the company behind ChatGPT during its early years.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1777509912,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 32,
"wordCount": 1208
},
"headData": {
"title": "Elon Musk Says Sam Altman Tricked Him Into Funding OpenAI | KQED",
"description": "On the second day of a trial pitting the Tesla founder against OpenAI, Elon Musk said he was a “fool” to support the company behind ChatGPT during its early years.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Elon Musk Says Sam Altman Tricked Him Into Funding OpenAI",
"datePublished": "2026-04-29T17:01:10-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-04-29T17:45:12-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 248,
"slug": "technology",
"name": "Technology"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12081798",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12081798/elon-musk-says-sam-altman-tricked-him-into-funding-openai",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>During the second day of the \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity\">landmark trial between Sam Altman and Elon Musk\u003c/a>, the Tesla founder told the Oakland courthouse that he was a “fool” to fund OpenAI through its early years.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Testifying in the lawsuit he brought against Altman, which claims the company’s creators betrayed their mission for profits, Musk suggested Wednesday that Altman and cofounder Greg Brockman wanted to “have your cake and eat it too.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If you go nonprofit, you’ve got a sort of moral high ground,” he testified.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s testimony tells one version of founding OpenAI: that he, fearing the dangers of artificial intelligence, pursued its development with the goal of benefiting the common good, alongside, he thought, like-minded collaborators. But behind the scenes, those cofounders engaged in a “long con” to profit at his expense.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“What they really wanted was a for-profit, where they could make as much money as possible,” Musk said later.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Whether the jury believes him will be integral to the decision they’re tasked with making, as they determine whether OpenAI breached charitable trust and engaged in unjust enrichment as it evolved from a nonprofit organization to its current $730 billion iteration.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under cross-examination, Altman’s attorney, William Savitt, questioned Musk’s story and credibility as an altruistic benefactor. He pointed to an email Musk sent to Altman in 2015, which said it would be “probably better” if OpenAI operated as a for-profit company with a parallel nonprofit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081637\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081637\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-01-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">OpenAI’s lead counsel, William Savitt, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>In another email sent to colleagues at his neurotechnology company, Neuralink, Musk said that Google’s AI development was moving very fast, and that he was concerned OpenAI was not on the path to catch up.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Setting it up as a nonprofit might, in hindsight, have been the wrong move,” Musk wrote. “Sense of urgency is not as high.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt asked if, in 2017, Musk suggested at a party that OpenAI should create a for-profit. He said it was just after the company’s AI model had beaten \u003cem>Defense of the Ancients, \u003c/em>a battle video game, which was a pivotal moment in the development process.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk said he didn’t remember giving instructions to create a for-profit at the time.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This was nine years ago,” he said.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12081603",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-02-KQED.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>Savitt said Tuesday that in 2017, OpenAI executives, including Musk, were in the midst of conversations about whether and how to transition the company to a for-profit structure.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to OpenAI’s court filings, as early as summer 2017, Musk had insisted on holding a majority equity stake in any for-profit entity, serving as CEO and controlling its board of directors.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Pressed by Savitt about what Musk meant by “expressing what you said about control,” the Tesla founder and billionaire said: “I try to be as literal as possible.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In the fall of 2017, Brockman and Ilya Sutskever, another top OpenAI executive, emailed Musk with concerns about the for-profit structure he proposed. Shortly thereafter, discussions over the structure collapsed, and Musk stopped making significant quarterly funding contributions, OpenAI alleges.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He left the company less than six months later.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt framed the breakdown and Musk’s exit as a result of his not getting control of the for-profit, and the other executives’ focus on maintaining its philanthropic mission. He suggested that Musk tried to pressure them to accept his terms by pausing the majority of his financial backing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“You knew that would create financial pressure for the organization,” Savitt said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081686\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081686\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Steve Molo, Elon Musk’s attorney, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk (center-right) claims that Sam Altman (right) and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Musk denied that was his intention. Instead, he alleged that Altman convinced Brockman and the others to go against his proposal, and that their concern over his desire for control was disingenuous.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I’m not going to fund something if I don’t have confidence in the people,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When asked whether he proposed that OpenAI be folded into Tesla, Musk said: “There were a lot of ideas that were brainstormed at the time.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In an email, he wrote that doing so would be the “only path that could even hope to hold a candle to Google.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk said he left OpenAI in February 2018 because he was focused on Tesla’s survival, and believed that OpenAI intended to continue operating as a nonprofit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Savitt also laid out a series of exchanges between Musk and Altman, in which the OpenAI CEO kept him apprised of the company’s corporate structure. He said in March 2018, Musk responded to an email that noted the creation of a for-profit entity of OpenAI with “OK by me,” and was sent a term sheet for OpenAI LP that summer.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12081290",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260422-ALTMANMUSK-MD-01-KQED.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>Savitt also said Altman emailed Musk a draft of the company’s public announcement of its for-profit arm in March 2019, and texted him asking if he had time to talk about Microsoft’s plan to invest in OpenAI. Musk never responded to that text, according to Savitt.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk said he was busy with his other companies in 2018, and while he was aware that it had added a for-profit entity, he hadn’t lost complete faith in the company. While he’d suspended quarterly $5 million funding contributions prior to his departure, he continued to make some contributions until 2020.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He said that he’d gone from enthusiastically supportive to uncertain about OpenAI’s mission, but that he’d fully suspended his contributions when he felt that the company was “deliberately not a nonprofit.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When asked why he waited until 2024 to bring the suit, Musk said that’s when he determined OpenAI breached charitable trust.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Thinking that someone might steal your car is not the same as [if] someone has stolen your car,” Musk said. He said after enlisting his attorney, Alex Spiro, to investigate, he heard from him in 2023 that “the car had been stolen.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I would have sued sooner if I thought the charity had been stolen sooner,” Musk continued.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The trial and Musk’s testimony are expected to continue on Thursday.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12081798/elon-musk-says-sam-altman-tricked-him-into-funding-openai",
"authors": [
"11913",
"251"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_6188",
"news_8",
"news_248"
],
"tags": [
"news_34755",
"news_32668",
"news_3897",
"news_27626",
"news_19954",
"news_21891",
"news_34054",
"news_33542",
"news_33543",
"news_34586",
"news_1631",
"news_57"
],
"featImg": "news_12081681",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12081603": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12081603",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12081603",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1777421165000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity",
"title": "Elon Musk Takes Aim at OpenAI as Trial Begins: ‘It’s Not OK to Steal a Charity’",
"publishDate": 1777421165,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Elon Musk Takes Aim at OpenAI as Trial Begins: ‘It’s Not OK to Steal a Charity’ | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>In a federal courtroom in Oakland on Tuesday, attorneys for tech elites Sam Altman and Elon Musk set the stage for a \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081290/how-to-unscramble-an-omelet-in-silicon-valley-the-musk-v-altman-trial-that-will-try\">landmark case to determine whether OpenAI\u003c/a>, one of the most powerful artificial intelligence companies in the world, was founded on a lie.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>At issue is whether the company’s stated mission — to lead AI development to benefit the common good — was authentic or a deceptive pitch designed to attract talent and investment. \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/forum/2010101912956/its-elon-musks-world-were-just-living-in-it\">Musk\u003c/a> alleges that co-founders Altman and Greg Brockman, who remains Altman’s second-in-command, participated in a “long con” to enrich themselves at his expense, after the three co-founded OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“They’re going to make this lawsuit very complicated, but it’s very simple,” Musk said of OpenAI on the stand on Tuesday afternoon. “It’s not OK to steal a charity.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He departed the company after a falling out and \u003ca href=\"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69013420/musk-v-altman/\">sued the company\u003c/a> in 2024, alleging that OpenAI had breached charitable trust by restructuring as a for-profit company, now valued at more than $800 billion.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But Altman’s attorneys called the Tesla CEO’s behavior “a tale of two Musks,” shifting from pushing for OpenAI to become a for-profit company under his control, to caring about its nonprofit status only after launching competitor xAI in 2023. They argue OpenAI’s decision to adopt a for-profit structure was integral to its survival.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We’re here because Mr. Musk didn’t get his way,” William Savitt, Altman’s lead attorney, said Tuesday. “And because he’s a competitor, he’ll do anything he can to attack OpenAI.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081686\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081686\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Steve Molo, Elon Musk’s attorney, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk (center-right) claims that Sam Altman (right) and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Steven Molo, Musk’s counsel, told the jury that when Musk, Altman and Brockman set out to found an AI nonprofit, their goals were to develop the technology safely and for the \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12034916/about-benefiting-humanity-calls-grow-for-openai-to-make-good-on-its-promises\">benefit of humanity\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It wasn’t a technology to get rich,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After operating as a strict nonprofit for years, OpenAI added a for-profit arm in 2019, which executives said was necessary to obtain the funding needed to develop artificial general intelligence — a more advanced AI technology that surpasses human intelligence, according to court filings.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In early conversations about how the for-profit entity would work, Molo said, the structure was likened to a museum gift shop whose revenue funds the institution’s galleries and operations. Brockman and Altman reassured Musk that they were still committed to the nonprofit structure, he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But behind the scenes, Molo alleges that the other co-founders had more lucrative desires.[aside postID=news_12081290 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260422-ALTMANMUSK-MD-01-KQED.jpg']In court filings, he cited a journal in which Brockman wrote that “it would be nice to be making the billions … we’ve been thinking that maybe we should just flip to a for-profit. making the money for us sounds great and all.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Brockman also wrote that he and another top OpenAI executive, Ilya Sutskever, “cannot say that we are committed to the non-profit. don’t wanna say that we’re committed. If three months later we’re doing B-Corp [a certification for for-profit corporations with social and environmental missions], then it was a lie.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Years later, after Musk had departed OpenAI, the company was “no longer operating for the good of humanity,” Molo said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“The museum store sold the Picassos,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s lawsuit claims OpenAI breached charitable trust and alleges unjust enrichment, which means that one party unfairly benefits at the expense of another. He also accuses Microsoft, which is the company’s largest financial backer and until this week held the exclusive rights to license and sell its technology, of aiding and abetting OpenAI’s breach of charitable trust.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>OpenAI’s defense, meanwhile, alleges that Musk’s suit is less motivated by a desire to do good than it is by vengeance for his former colleagues, whose company is now eyeing an initial public offering valued at up to $1 trillion.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Musk sat on his claims for years,” Savitt said. “He knew everything that was happening when it was happening. My clients had the nerve to go out and succeed without him.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He also pointed out that Musk launched xAI a year before bringing the lawsuit, which would make OpenAI his competitor.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081681\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081681\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Representing Microsoft, Russell Coan (left) speaks as Elon Musk watches in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Savitt pointed to moments early in OpenAI’s development, when Musk suggested that it would be “probably better” for the company to operate as a “standard C corp[oration] with a parallel nonprofit.” He initially promised to cover the balance of the funding it needed, but reneged when he didn’t get to control the company, Savitt told the jury.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk was in the middle of the conversations about pivoting from a nonprofit, Savitt said. As early as the summer of 2017, he insisted on holding a majority equity stake in any for-profit entity, as well as controlling its board of directors and serving as CEO, according to OpenAI’s court filings.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In the fall of that year, after Brockman and Sutskever emailed Musk with concerns about the for-profit structure he proposed, the discussions collapsed, OpenAI alleges. After that, Musk stopped making significant quarterly funding contributions, and he left the company less than six months later.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Around that time, Brockman and Altman moved to pursue a for-profit arm — a decision their attorneys say they told Musk about prior to his departure from the board.[aside postID=news_12079896 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/Daniel-Moreno-Gama-AP.jpg']Savitt said in court that Musk had given the company less than 4% of the funding he’d promised. While OpenAI had gotten contributions from other donors, he said, those “kept the lights on, but it wasn’t nearly enough to stay on the cutting edge.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“They needed to get the money from somewhere, or else the project collapsed,” he said, alleging that donors weren’t willing to make the billion-dollar contributions that OpenAI needed without an expectation of return.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Since OpenAI established its first for-profit subsidiary, which capped investor returns at 100 times their investment, its business has exploded. It’s now a public benefit corporation, required to consider its mission statement but not necessarily to prioritize it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Over the years, its mission statement has been changed several times. In 2023, according to the nonprofit parent organization’s \u003ca href=\"https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/4099/2023-IRS990-OpenAI.pdf?1770819990\">IRS disclosure form\u003c/a>, it sought to build AI that “safely benefits humanity, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return.” But last year, \u003ca href=\"https://app.candid.org/profile/9571629/openai-81-0861541?activeTab=7\">that same form\u003c/a> included a shorter mission statement — one that removed the word “safely” and any mention of finances, Tufts University business professor Alnoor Ebrahim \u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/openai-has-deleted-the-word-safely-from-its-mission-and-its-new-structure-is-a-test-for-whether-ai-serves-society-or-shareholders-274467\">wrote in \u003cem>The Conversation\u003c/em>\u003c/a>, an academic news outlet.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Former OpenAI employees have left and started a competitor, Anthropic, citing concerns over safety and the company’s direction. In 2023, OpenAI executives and board members, including Sutskever, staged a coup to briefly oust Altman as CEO. They said there’d been a breakdown in trust between him and the board, and that Altman engaged in a pattern of deception and wasn’t “consistently candid in his communications.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Whether Altman’s and OpenAI’s pitch to develop their technology for the benefit of the world is an example of that deception is part of what jurors will aim to root out in the current trial.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I didn’t want to pave the road to hell with good intentions,” Musk said on the stand on Tuesday afternoon. “If you have somebody who’s not trustworthy in charge of AI, I think that’s very dangerous for the whole world.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "In a federal courtroom in Oakland, attorneys for tech elites Sam Altman and Elon Musk painted very different pictures of the early years of OpenAI and its mission to benefit the common good.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1777482966,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 30,
"wordCount": 1473
},
"headData": {
"title": "Elon Musk Takes Aim at OpenAI as Trial Begins: ‘It’s Not OK to Steal a Charity’ | KQED",
"description": "In a federal courtroom in Oakland, attorneys for tech elites Sam Altman and Elon Musk painted very different pictures of the early years of OpenAI and its mission to benefit the common good.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Elon Musk Takes Aim at OpenAI as Trial Begins: ‘It’s Not OK to Steal a Charity’",
"datePublished": "2026-04-28T17:06:05-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-04-29T10:16:06-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 248,
"slug": "technology",
"name": "Technology"
},
"audioUrl": "https://traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/0af137ef-751e-4b19-a055-aaef00d2d578/87fdd794-f90e-4280-920f-ab89016e8062/3ac84f6e-ca1f-4213-bd14-b43a01848097/audio.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12081603",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>In a federal courtroom in Oakland on Tuesday, attorneys for tech elites Sam Altman and Elon Musk set the stage for a \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12081290/how-to-unscramble-an-omelet-in-silicon-valley-the-musk-v-altman-trial-that-will-try\">landmark case to determine whether OpenAI\u003c/a>, one of the most powerful artificial intelligence companies in the world, was founded on a lie.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>At issue is whether the company’s stated mission — to lead AI development to benefit the common good — was authentic or a deceptive pitch designed to attract talent and investment. \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/forum/2010101912956/its-elon-musks-world-were-just-living-in-it\">Musk\u003c/a> alleges that co-founders Altman and Greg Brockman, who remains Altman’s second-in-command, participated in a “long con” to enrich themselves at his expense, after the three co-founded OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“They’re going to make this lawsuit very complicated, but it’s very simple,” Musk said of OpenAI on the stand on Tuesday afternoon. “It’s not OK to steal a charity.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He departed the company after a falling out and \u003ca href=\"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69013420/musk-v-altman/\">sued the company\u003c/a> in 2024, alleging that OpenAI had breached charitable trust by restructuring as a for-profit company, now valued at more than $800 billion.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But Altman’s attorneys called the Tesla CEO’s behavior “a tale of two Musks,” shifting from pushing for OpenAI to become a for-profit company under his control, to caring about its nonprofit status only after launching competitor xAI in 2023. They argue OpenAI’s decision to adopt a for-profit structure was integral to its survival.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We’re here because Mr. Musk didn’t get his way,” William Savitt, Altman’s lead attorney, said Tuesday. “And because he’s a competitor, he’ll do anything he can to attack OpenAI.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081686\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081686\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-04-KQED-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Steve Molo, Elon Musk’s attorney, presents opening statements in the trial in which Elon Musk (center-right) claims that Sam Altman (right) and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Steven Molo, Musk’s counsel, told the jury that when Musk, Altman and Brockman set out to found an AI nonprofit, their goals were to develop the technology safely and for the \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12034916/about-benefiting-humanity-calls-grow-for-openai-to-make-good-on-its-promises\">benefit of humanity\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It wasn’t a technology to get rich,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After operating as a strict nonprofit for years, OpenAI added a for-profit arm in 2019, which executives said was necessary to obtain the funding needed to develop artificial general intelligence — a more advanced AI technology that surpasses human intelligence, according to court filings.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In early conversations about how the for-profit entity would work, Molo said, the structure was likened to a museum gift shop whose revenue funds the institution’s galleries and operations. Brockman and Altman reassured Musk that they were still committed to the nonprofit structure, he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But behind the scenes, Molo alleges that the other co-founders had more lucrative desires.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12081290",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260422-ALTMANMUSK-MD-01-KQED.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>In court filings, he cited a journal in which Brockman wrote that “it would be nice to be making the billions … we’ve been thinking that maybe we should just flip to a for-profit. making the money for us sounds great and all.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Brockman also wrote that he and another top OpenAI executive, Ilya Sutskever, “cannot say that we are committed to the non-profit. don’t wanna say that we’re committed. If three months later we’re doing B-Corp [a certification for for-profit corporations with social and environmental missions], then it was a lie.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Years later, after Musk had departed OpenAI, the company was “no longer operating for the good of humanity,” Molo said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“The museum store sold the Picassos,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk’s lawsuit claims OpenAI breached charitable trust and alleges unjust enrichment, which means that one party unfairly benefits at the expense of another. He also accuses Microsoft, which is the company’s largest financial backer and until this week held the exclusive rights to license and sell its technology, of aiding and abetting OpenAI’s breach of charitable trust.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>OpenAI’s defense, meanwhile, alleges that Musk’s suit is less motivated by a desire to do good than it is by vengeance for his former colleagues, whose company is now eyeing an initial public offering valued at up to $1 trillion.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Musk sat on his claims for years,” Savitt said. “He knew everything that was happening when it was happening. My clients had the nerve to go out and succeed without him.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He also pointed out that Musk launched xAI a year before bringing the lawsuit, which would make OpenAI his competitor.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12081681\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12081681\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1125\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-160x90.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260428-MUSK-ALTMAN-VB-03-KQED-1-1200x675.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Representing Microsoft, Russell Coan (left) speaks as Elon Musk watches in the trial in which Elon Musk claims that Sam Altman and OpenAI abandoned their founding promise to develop AI for the benefit of humanity, rather than solely for profit, in Oakland on April 28, 2026. \u003ccite>(Vicki Behringer for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Savitt pointed to moments early in OpenAI’s development, when Musk suggested that it would be “probably better” for the company to operate as a “standard C corp[oration] with a parallel nonprofit.” He initially promised to cover the balance of the funding it needed, but reneged when he didn’t get to control the company, Savitt told the jury.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Musk was in the middle of the conversations about pivoting from a nonprofit, Savitt said. As early as the summer of 2017, he insisted on holding a majority equity stake in any for-profit entity, as well as controlling its board of directors and serving as CEO, according to OpenAI’s court filings.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In the fall of that year, after Brockman and Sutskever emailed Musk with concerns about the for-profit structure he proposed, the discussions collapsed, OpenAI alleges. After that, Musk stopped making significant quarterly funding contributions, and he left the company less than six months later.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Around that time, Brockman and Altman moved to pursue a for-profit arm — a decision their attorneys say they told Musk about prior to his departure from the board.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12079896",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/Daniel-Moreno-Gama-AP.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>Savitt said in court that Musk had given the company less than 4% of the funding he’d promised. While OpenAI had gotten contributions from other donors, he said, those “kept the lights on, but it wasn’t nearly enough to stay on the cutting edge.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“They needed to get the money from somewhere, or else the project collapsed,” he said, alleging that donors weren’t willing to make the billion-dollar contributions that OpenAI needed without an expectation of return.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Since OpenAI established its first for-profit subsidiary, which capped investor returns at 100 times their investment, its business has exploded. It’s now a public benefit corporation, required to consider its mission statement but not necessarily to prioritize it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Over the years, its mission statement has been changed several times. In 2023, according to the nonprofit parent organization’s \u003ca href=\"https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/4099/2023-IRS990-OpenAI.pdf?1770819990\">IRS disclosure form\u003c/a>, it sought to build AI that “safely benefits humanity, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return.” But last year, \u003ca href=\"https://app.candid.org/profile/9571629/openai-81-0861541?activeTab=7\">that same form\u003c/a> included a shorter mission statement — one that removed the word “safely” and any mention of finances, Tufts University business professor Alnoor Ebrahim \u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/openai-has-deleted-the-word-safely-from-its-mission-and-its-new-structure-is-a-test-for-whether-ai-serves-society-or-shareholders-274467\">wrote in \u003cem>The Conversation\u003c/em>\u003c/a>, an academic news outlet.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Former OpenAI employees have left and started a competitor, Anthropic, citing concerns over safety and the company’s direction. In 2023, OpenAI executives and board members, including Sutskever, staged a coup to briefly oust Altman as CEO. They said there’d been a breakdown in trust between him and the board, and that Altman engaged in a pattern of deception and wasn’t “consistently candid in his communications.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Whether Altman’s and OpenAI’s pitch to develop their technology for the benefit of the world is an example of that deception is part of what jurors will aim to root out in the current trial.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I didn’t want to pave the road to hell with good intentions,” Musk said on the stand on Tuesday afternoon. “If you have somebody who’s not trustworthy in charge of AI, I think that’s very dangerous for the whole world.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12081603/elon-musk-takes-aim-at-openai-as-trial-begins-its-not-ok-to-steal-a-charity",
"authors": [
"11913",
"251"
],
"categories": [
"news_6188",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_248"
],
"tags": [
"news_34755",
"news_32668",
"news_18352",
"news_3897",
"news_27626",
"news_19954",
"news_34054",
"news_33542",
"news_33543",
"news_34586",
"news_1631"
],
"featImg": "news_12081639",
"label": "news"
}
},
"programsReducer": {
"all-things-considered": {
"id": "all-things-considered",
"title": "All Things Considered",
"info": "Every weekday, \u003cem>All Things Considered\u003c/em> hosts Robert Siegel, Audie Cornish, Ari Shapiro, and Kelly McEvers present the program's trademark mix of news, interviews, commentaries, reviews, and offbeat features. Michel Martin hosts on the weekends.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 1pm-2pm, 4:30pm-6:30pm\u003cbr />SAT-SUN 5pm-6pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/All-Things-Considered-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/all-things-considered/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/all-things-considered"
},
"american-suburb-podcast": {
"id": "american-suburb-podcast",
"title": "American Suburb: The Podcast",
"tagline": "The flip side of gentrification, told through one town",
"info": "Gentrification is changing cities across America, forcing people from neighborhoods they have long called home. Call them the displaced. Now those priced out of the Bay Area are looking for a better life in an unlikely place. American Suburb follows this migration to one California town along the Delta, 45 miles from San Francisco. But is this once sleepy suburb ready for them?",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/American-Suburb-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/news/series/american-suburb-podcast",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 19
},
"link": "/news/series/american-suburb-podcast/",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/RBrW",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?mt=2&id=1287748328",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/American-Suburb-p1086805/",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/series/american-suburb-podcast/feed/podcast",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkMzMDExODgxNjA5"
}
},
"baycurious": {
"id": "baycurious",
"title": "Bay Curious",
"tagline": "Exploring the Bay Area, one question at a time",
"info": "KQED’s new podcast, Bay Curious, gets to the bottom of the mysteries — both profound and peculiar — that give the Bay Area its unique identity. And we’ll do it with your help! You ask the questions. You decide what Bay Curious investigates. And you join us on the journey to find the answers.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Bay-Curious-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Bay Curious",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/news/series/baycurious",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 3
},
"link": "/podcasts/baycurious",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bay-curious/id1172473406",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/500557090/bay-curious",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/category/bay-curious-podcast/feed/podcast",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9a90d476-aa04-455d-9a4c-0871ed6216d4/bay-curious",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/bay-curious",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/6O76IdmhixfijmhTZLIJ8k"
}
},
"bbc-world-service": {
"id": "bbc-world-service",
"title": "BBC World Service",
"info": "The day's top stories from BBC News compiled twice daily in the week, once at weekends.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 9pm-10pm, TUE-FRI 1am-2am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/BBC-World-Service-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_world_service",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "BBC World Service"
},
"link": "/radio/program/bbc-world-service",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/global-news-podcast/id135067274?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/BBC-World-Service-p455581/",
"rss": "https://podcasts.files.bbci.co.uk/p02nq0gn.rss"
}
},
"californiareport": {
"id": "californiareport",
"title": "The California Report",
"tagline": "California, day by day",
"info": "KQED’s statewide radio news program providing daily coverage of issues, trends and public policy decisions.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-California-Report-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The California Report",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/californiareport",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 8
},
"link": "/californiareport",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/kqeds-the-california-report/id79681292",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/26099305-72af-4542-9dde-ac1807fe36d5/kqed-s-the-california-report",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432285393/the-california-report",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqedfm-kqeds-the-california-report-podcast-8838",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/tcram/feed/podcast"
}
},
"californiareportmagazine": {
"id": "californiareportmagazine",
"title": "The California Report Magazine",
"tagline": "Your state, your stories",
"info": "Every week, The California Report Magazine takes you on a road trip for the ears: to visit the places and meet the people who make California unique. The in-depth storytelling podcast from the California Report.",
"airtime": "FRI 4:30pm-5pm, 6:30pm-7pm, 11pm-11:30pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-California-Report-Magazine-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The California Report Magazine",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/californiareportmagazine",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 10
},
"link": "/californiareportmagazine",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-california-report-magazine/id1314750545",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM3NjkwNjk1OTAz",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/564733126/the-california-report-magazine",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-california-report-magazine",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/tcrmag/feed/podcast"
}
},
"city-arts": {
"id": "city-arts",
"title": "City Arts & Lectures",
"info": "A one-hour radio program to hear celebrated writers, artists and thinkers address contemporary ideas and values, often discussing the creative process. Please note: tapes or transcripts are not available",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/cityartsandlecture-300x300.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.cityarts.net/",
"airtime": "SUN 1pm-2pm, TUE 10pm, WED 1am",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "City Arts & Lectures"
},
"link": "https://www.cityarts.net",
"subscribe": {
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/City-Arts-and-Lectures-p692/",
"rss": "https://www.cityarts.net/feed/"
}
},
"closealltabs": {
"id": "closealltabs",
"title": "Close All Tabs",
"tagline": "Your irreverent guide to the trends redefining our world",
"info": "Close All Tabs breaks down how digital culture shapes our world through thoughtful insights and irreverent humor.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/CAT_2_Tile-scaled.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Close All Tabs",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/closealltabs",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 1
},
"link": "/podcasts/closealltabs",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/close-all-tabs/id214663465",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC6993880386",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/92d9d4ac-67a3-4eed-b10a-fb45d45b1ef2/close-all-tabs",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/6LAJFHnGK1pYXYzv6SIol6?si=deb0cae19813417c"
}
},
"code-switch-life-kit": {
"id": "code-switch-life-kit",
"title": "Code Switch / Life Kit",
"info": "\u003cem>Code Switch\u003c/em>, which listeners will hear in the first part of the hour, has fearless and much-needed conversations about race. Hosted by journalists of color, the show tackles the subject of race head-on, exploring how it impacts every part of society — from politics and pop culture to history, sports and more.\u003cbr />\u003cbr />\u003cem>Life Kit\u003c/em>, which will be in the second part of the hour, guides you through spaces and feelings no one prepares you for — from finances to mental health, from workplace microaggressions to imposter syndrome, from relationships to parenting. The show features experts with real world experience and shares their knowledge. Because everyone needs a little help being human.\u003cbr />\u003cbr />\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510312/codeswitch\">\u003cem>Code Switch\u003c/em> offical site and podcast\u003c/a>\u003cbr />\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/lifekit\">\u003cem>Life Kit\u003c/em> offical site and podcast\u003c/a>\u003cbr />",
"airtime": "SUN 9pm-10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Code-Switch-Life-Kit-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/code-switch-life-kit",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/1112190608?mt=2&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnByLm9yZy9yc3MvcG9kY2FzdC5waHA_aWQ9NTEwMzEy",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3bExJ9JQpkwNhoHvaIIuyV",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510312/podcast.xml"
}
},
"commonwealth-club": {
"id": "commonwealth-club",
"title": "Commonwealth Club of California Podcast",
"info": "The Commonwealth Club of California is the nation's oldest and largest public affairs forum. As a non-partisan forum, The Club brings to the public airwaves diverse viewpoints on important topics. The Club's weekly radio broadcast - the oldest in the U.S., dating back to 1924 - is carried across the nation on public radio stations and is now podcasting. Our website archive features audio of our recent programs, as well as selected speeches from our long and distinguished history. This podcast feed is usually updated twice a week and is always un-edited.",
"airtime": "THU 10pm, FRI 1am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Commonwealth-Club-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.commonwealthclub.org/podcasts",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "Commonwealth Club of California"
},
"link": "/radio/program/commonwealth-club",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/commonwealth-club-of-california-podcast/id976334034?mt=2",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jb21tb253ZWFsdGhjbHViLm9yZy9hdWRpby9wb2RjYXN0L3dlZWtseS54bWw",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Commonwealth-Club-of-California-p1060/"
}
},
"forum": {
"id": "forum",
"title": "Forum",
"tagline": "The conversation starts here",
"info": "KQED’s live call-in program discussing local, state, national and international issues, as well as in-depth interviews.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 9am-11am, 10pm-11pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Forum-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Forum with Mina Kim and Alexis Madrigal",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/forum",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 9
},
"link": "/forum",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/kqeds-forum/id73329719",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM5NTU3MzgxNjMz",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432307980/forum",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqedfm-kqeds-forum-podcast",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC9557381633"
}
},
"freakonomics-radio": {
"id": "freakonomics-radio",
"title": "Freakonomics Radio",
"info": "Freakonomics Radio is a one-hour award-winning podcast and public-radio project hosted by Stephen Dubner, with co-author Steve Levitt as a regular guest. It is produced in partnership with WNYC.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/05/freakonomicsRadio.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://freakonomics.com/",
"airtime": "SUN 1am-2am, SAT 3pm-4pm",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/freakonomics-radio",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/4s8b",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/freakonomics-radio/id354668519",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/WNYC-Podcasts/Freakonomics-Radio-p272293/",
"rss": "https://feeds.feedburner.com/freakonomicsradio"
}
},
"fresh-air": {
"id": "fresh-air",
"title": "Fresh Air",
"info": "Hosted by Terry Gross, \u003cem>Fresh Air from WHYY\u003c/em> is the Peabody Award-winning weekday magazine of contemporary arts and issues. One of public radio's most popular programs, Fresh Air features intimate conversations with today's biggest luminaries.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 7pm-8pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Fresh-Air-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/fresh-air",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/4s8b",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=214089682&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Fresh-Air-p17/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/381444908/podcast.xml"
}
},
"here-and-now": {
"id": "here-and-now",
"title": "Here & Now",
"info": "A live production of NPR and WBUR Boston, in collaboration with stations across the country, Here & Now reflects the fluid world of news as it's happening in the middle of the day, with timely, in-depth news, interviews and conversation. Hosted by Robin Young, Jeremy Hobson and Tonya Mosley.",
"airtime": "MON-THU 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Here-And-Now-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/here-and-now",
"subsdcribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?mt=2&id=426698661",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Here--Now-p211/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510051/podcast.xml"
}
},
"hidden-brain": {
"id": "hidden-brain",
"title": "Hidden Brain",
"info": "Shankar Vedantam uses science and storytelling to reveal the unconscious patterns that drive human behavior, shape our choices and direct our relationships.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/hiddenbrain.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/series/423302056/hidden-brain",
"airtime": "SUN 7pm-8pm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "NPR"
},
"link": "/radio/program/hidden-brain",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-brain/id1028908750?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Science-Podcasts/Hidden-Brain-p787503/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510308/podcast.xml"
}
},
"how-i-built-this": {
"id": "how-i-built-this",
"title": "How I Built This with Guy Raz",
"info": "Guy Raz dives into the stories behind some of the world's best known companies. How I Built This weaves a narrative journey about innovators, entrepreneurs and idealists—and the movements they built.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/05/howIBuiltThis.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this",
"airtime": "SUN 7:30pm-8pm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/how-i-built-this",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/3zxy",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/how-i-built-this-with-guy-raz/id1150510297?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Arts--Culture-Podcasts/How-I-Built-This-p910896/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510313/podcast.xml"
}
},
"hyphenacion": {
"id": "hyphenacion",
"title": "Hyphenación",
"tagline": "Where conversation and cultura meet",
"info": "What kind of no sabo word is Hyphenación? For us, it’s about living within a hyphenation. Like being a third-gen Mexican-American from the Texas border now living that Bay Area Chicano life. Like Xorje! Each week we bring together a couple of hyphenated Latinos to talk all about personal life choices: family, careers, relationships, belonging … everything is on the table. ",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Hyphenacion_FinalAssets_PodcastTile.png",
"imageAlt": "KQED Hyphenación",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/hyphenacion",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 15
},
"link": "/podcasts/hyphenacion",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hyphenaci%C3%B3n/id1191591838",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/2p3Fifq96nw9BPcmFdIq0o?si=39209f7b25774f38",
"youtube": "https://www.youtube.com/c/kqedarts",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/6c3dd23c-93fb-4aab-97ba-1725fa6315f1/hyphenaci%C3%B3n",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC2275451163"
}
},
"jerrybrown": {
"id": "jerrybrown",
"title": "The Political Mind of Jerry Brown",
"tagline": "Lessons from a lifetime in politics",
"info": "The Political Mind of Jerry Brown brings listeners the wisdom of the former Governor, Mayor, and presidential candidate. Scott Shafer interviewed Brown for more than 40 hours, covering the former governor's life and half-century in the political game – and Brown has some lessons he'd like to share. ",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Political-Mind-of-Jerry-Brown-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Political Mind of Jerry Brown",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/jerrybrown",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 18
},
"link": "/podcasts/jerrybrown",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/790253322/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1492194549",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/series/jerrybrown/feed/podcast/",
"tuneIn": "http://tun.in/pjGcK",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/54C1dmuyFyKMFttY6X2j6r?si=K8SgRCoISNK6ZbjpXrX5-w",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/44420f75-3b0e-4301-ab3b-16da6b09e543/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown"
}
},
"latino-usa": {
"id": "latino-usa",
"title": "Latino USA",
"airtime": "MON 1am-2am, SUN 6pm-7pm",
"info": "Latino USA, the radio journal of news and culture, is the only national, English-language radio program produced from a Latino perspective.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/latinoUsa.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://latinousa.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/latino-usa",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/xtTd",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=79681317&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Latino-USA-p621/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510016/podcast.xml"
}
},
"marketplace": {
"id": "marketplace",
"title": "Marketplace",
"info": "Our flagship program, helmed by Kai Ryssdal, examines what the day in money delivered, through stories, conversations, newsworthy numbers and more. Updated Monday through Friday at about 3:30 p.m. PT.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 4pm-4:30pm, MON-WED 6:30pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Marketplace-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.marketplace.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "American Public Media"
},
"link": "/radio/program/marketplace",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=201853034&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/APM-Marketplace-p88/",
"rss": "https://feeds.publicradio.org/public_feeds/marketplace-pm/rss/rss"
}
},
"masters-of-scale": {
"id": "masters-of-scale",
"title": "Masters of Scale",
"info": "Masters of Scale is an original podcast in which LinkedIn co-founder and Greylock Partner Reid Hoffman sets out to describe and prove theories that explain how great entrepreneurs take their companies from zero to a gazillion in ingenious fashion.",
"airtime": "Every other Wednesday June 12 through October 16 at 8pm (repeats Thursdays at 2am)",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Masters-of-Scale-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://mastersofscale.com/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "WaitWhat"
},
"link": "/radio/program/masters-of-scale",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "http://mastersofscale.app.link/",
"rss": "https://rss.art19.com/masters-of-scale"
}
},
"mindshift": {
"id": "mindshift",
"title": "MindShift",
"tagline": "A podcast about the future of learning and how we raise our kids",
"info": "The MindShift podcast explores the innovations in education that are shaping how kids learn. Hosts Ki Sung and Katrina Schwartz introduce listeners to educators, researchers, parents and students who are developing effective ways to improve how kids learn. We cover topics like how fed-up administrators are developing surprising tactics to deal with classroom disruptions; how listening to podcasts are helping kids develop reading skills; the consequences of overparenting; and why interdisciplinary learning can engage students on all ends of the traditional achievement spectrum. This podcast is part of the MindShift education site, a division of KQED News. KQED is an NPR/PBS member station based in San Francisco. You can also visit the MindShift website for episodes and supplemental blog posts or tweet us \u003ca href=\"https://twitter.com/MindShiftKQED\">@MindShiftKQED\u003c/a> or visit us at \u003ca href=\"/mindshift\">MindShift.KQED.org\u003c/a>",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Mindshift-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED MindShift: How We Will Learn",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/mindshift/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 12
},
"link": "/podcasts/mindshift",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mindshift-podcast/id1078765985",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM1NzY0NjAwNDI5",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/464615685/mind-shift-podcast",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/stories-teachers-share",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/0MxSpNYZKNprFLCl7eEtyx"
}
},
"morning-edition": {
"id": "morning-edition",
"title": "Morning Edition",
"info": "\u003cem>Morning Edition\u003c/em> takes listeners around the country and the world with multi-faceted stories and commentaries every weekday. Hosts Steve Inskeep, David Greene and Rachel Martin bring you the latest breaking news and features to prepare you for the day.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 3am-9am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Morning-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/morning-edition/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/morning-edition"
},
"onourwatch": {
"id": "onourwatch",
"title": "On Our Watch",
"tagline": "Deeply-reported investigative journalism",
"info": "For decades, the process for how police police themselves has been inconsistent – if not opaque. In some states, like California, these proceedings were completely hidden. After a new police transparency law unsealed scores of internal affairs files, our reporters set out to examine these cases and the shadow world of police discipline. On Our Watch brings listeners into the rooms where officers are questioned and witnesses are interrogated to find out who this system is really protecting. Is it the officers, or the public they've sworn to serve?",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/On-Our-Watch-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "On Our Watch from NPR and KQED",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/onourwatch",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 11
},
"link": "/podcasts/onourwatch",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1567098962",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5ucHIub3JnLzUxMDM2MC9wb2RjYXN0LnhtbD9zYz1nb29nbGVwb2RjYXN0cw",
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/onourwatch",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/0OLWoyizopu6tY1XiuX70x",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/On-Our-Watch-p1436229/",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/show/on-our-watch",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510360/podcast.xml"
}
},
"on-the-media": {
"id": "on-the-media",
"title": "On The Media",
"info": "Our weekly podcast explores how the media 'sausage' is made, casts an incisive eye on fluctuations in the marketplace of ideas, and examines threats to the freedom of information and expression in America and abroad. For one hour a week, the show tries to lift the veil from the process of \"making media,\" especially news media, because it's through that lens that we see the world and the world sees us",
"airtime": "SUN 2pm-3pm, MON 12am-1am",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/onTheMedia.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/otm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "wnyc"
},
"link": "/radio/program/on-the-media",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/on-the-media/id73330715?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/On-the-Media-p69/",
"rss": "http://feeds.wnyc.org/onthemedia"
}
},
"pbs-newshour": {
"id": "pbs-newshour",
"title": "PBS NewsHour",
"info": "Analysis, background reports and updates from the PBS NewsHour putting today's news in context.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 3pm-4pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/PBS-News-Hour-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "pbs"
},
"link": "/radio/program/pbs-newshour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/pbs-newshour-full-show/id394432287?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/PBS-NewsHour---Full-Show-p425698/",
"rss": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/feeds/rss/podcasts/show"
}
},
"perspectives": {
"id": "perspectives",
"title": "Perspectives",
"tagline": "KQED's series of daily listener commentaries since 1991",
"info": "KQED's series of daily listener commentaries since 1991.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Perspectives_Tile_Final.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Perspectives",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/perspectives/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 14
},
"link": "/perspectives",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/id73801135",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432309616/perspectives",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/perspectives/category/perspectives/feed/",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93dzIua3FlZC5vcmcvcGVyc3BlY3RpdmVzL2NhdGVnb3J5L3BlcnNwZWN0aXZlcy9mZWVkLw"
}
},
"planet-money": {
"id": "planet-money",
"title": "Planet Money",
"info": "The economy explained. Imagine you could call up a friend and say, Meet me at the bar and tell me what's going on with the economy. Now imagine that's actually a fun evening.",
"airtime": "SUN 3pm-4pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/planetmoney.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/sections/money/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/planet-money",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/M4f5",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/planet-money/id290783428?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Business--Economics-Podcasts/Planet-Money-p164680/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510289/podcast.xml"
}
},
"politicalbreakdown": {
"id": "politicalbreakdown",
"title": "Political Breakdown",
"tagline": "Politics from a personal perspective",
"info": "Political Breakdown is a new series that explores the political intersection of California and the nation. Each week hosts Scott Shafer and Marisa Lagos are joined with a new special guest to unpack politics -- with personality — and offer an insider’s glimpse at how politics happens.",
"airtime": "THU 6:30pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Political-Breakdown-2024-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Political Breakdown",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/politicalbreakdown",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 5
},
"link": "/podcasts/politicalbreakdown",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/political-breakdown/id1327641087",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/e0c2d153-ad36-4c8d-901d-f1da6a724824/political-breakdown",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/572155894/political-breakdown",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/political-breakdown",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/07RVyIjIdk2WDuVehvBMoN",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/political-breakdown/feed/podcast"
}
},
"possible": {
"id": "possible",
"title": "Possible",
"info": "Possible is hosted by entrepreneur Reid Hoffman and writer Aria Finger. Together in Possible, Hoffman and Finger lead enlightening discussions about building a brighter collective future. The show features interviews with visionary guests like Trevor Noah, Sam Altman and Janette Sadik-Khan. Possible paints an optimistic portrait of the world we can create through science, policy, business, art and our shared humanity. It asks: What if everything goes right for once? How can we get there? Each episode also includes a short fiction story generated by advanced AI GPT-4, serving as a thought-provoking springboard to speculate how humanity could leverage technology for good.",
"airtime": "SUN 2pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Possible-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.possible.fm/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "Possible"
},
"link": "/radio/program/possible",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/possible/id1677184070",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/730YpdUSNlMyPQwNnyjp4k"
}
},
"pri-the-world": {
"id": "pri-the-world",
"title": "PRI's The World: Latest Edition",
"info": "Each weekday, host Marco Werman and his team of producers bring you the world's most interesting stories in an hour of radio that reminds us just how small our planet really is.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 2pm-3pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-World-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.pri.org/programs/the-world",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "PRI"
},
"link": "/radio/program/pri-the-world",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/pris-the-world-latest-edition/id278196007?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Politics-Podcasts/PRIs-The-World-p24/",
"rss": "http://feeds.feedburner.com/pri/theworld"
}
},
"radiolab": {
"id": "radiolab",
"title": "Radiolab",
"info": "A two-time Peabody Award-winner, Radiolab is an investigation told through sounds and stories, and centered around one big idea. In the Radiolab world, information sounds like music and science and culture collide. Hosted by Jad Abumrad and Robert Krulwich, the show is designed for listeners who demand skepticism, but appreciate wonder. WNYC Studios is the producer of other leading podcasts including Freakonomics Radio, Death, Sex & Money, On the Media and many more.",
"airtime": "SUN 12am-1am, SAT 2pm-3pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/radiolab1400.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/radiolab/",
"meta": {
"site": "science",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/radiolab",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/radiolab/id152249110?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/RadioLab-p68032/",
"rss": "https://feeds.wnyc.org/radiolab"
}
},
"reveal": {
"id": "reveal",
"title": "Reveal",
"info": "Created by The Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX, Reveal is public radios first one-hour weekly radio show and podcast dedicated to investigative reporting. Credible, fact based and without a partisan agenda, Reveal combines the power and artistry of driveway moment storytelling with data-rich reporting on critically important issues. The result is stories that inform and inspire, arming our listeners with information to right injustices, hold the powerful accountable and improve lives.Reveal is hosted by Al Letson and showcases the award-winning work of CIR and newsrooms large and small across the nation. In a radio and podcast market crowded with choices, Reveal focuses on important and often surprising stories that illuminate the world for our listeners.",
"airtime": "SAT 4pm-5pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/reveal300px.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/reveal",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/reveal/id886009669",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Reveal-p679597/",
"rss": "http://feeds.revealradio.org/revealpodcast"
}
},
"rightnowish": {
"id": "rightnowish",
"title": "Rightnowish",
"tagline": "Art is where you find it",
"info": "Rightnowish digs into life in the Bay Area right now… ish. Journalist Pendarvis Harshaw takes us to galleries painted on the sides of liquor stores in West Oakland. We'll dance in warehouses in the Bayview, make smoothies with kids in South Berkeley, and listen to classical music in a 1984 Cutlass Supreme in Richmond. Every week, Pen talks to movers and shakers about how the Bay Area shapes what they create, and how they shape the place we call home.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Rightnowish-Podcast-Tile-500x500-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Rightnowish with Pendarvis Harshaw",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/rightnowish",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 16
},
"link": "/podcasts/rightnowish",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/721590300/rightnowish",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/arts/programs/rightnowish/feed/podcast",
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rightnowish/id1482187648",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/rightnowish",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkMxMjU5MTY3NDc4",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/7kEJuafTzTVan7B78ttz1I"
}
},
"science-friday": {
"id": "science-friday",
"title": "Science Friday",
"info": "Science Friday is a weekly science talk show, broadcast live over public radio stations nationwide. Each week, the show focuses on science topics that are in the news and tries to bring an educated, balanced discussion to bear on the scientific issues at hand. Panels of expert guests join host Ira Flatow, a veteran science journalist, to discuss science and to take questions from listeners during the call-in portion of the program.",
"airtime": "FRI 11am-1pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Science-Friday-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/science-friday",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/science-friday",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=73329284&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Science-Friday-p394/",
"rss": "http://feeds.wnyc.org/science-friday"
}
},
"snap-judgment": {
"id": "snap-judgment",
"title": "Snap Judgment",
"tagline": "Real stories with killer beats",
"info": "The Snap Judgment radio show and podcast mixes real stories with killer beats to produce cinematic, dramatic radio. Snap's musical brand of storytelling dares listeners to see the world through the eyes of another. This is storytelling... with a BEAT!! Snap first aired on public radio stations nationwide in July 2010. Today, Snap Judgment airs on over 450 public radio stations and is brought to the airwaves by KQED & PRX.",
"airtime": "SAT 1pm-2pm, 9pm-10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Snap-Judgment-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Snap Judgment",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://snapjudgment.org",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 4
},
"link": "https://snapjudgment.org",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/snap-judgment/id283657561",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/449018144/snap-judgment",
"stitcher": "https://www.pandora.com/podcast/snap-judgment/PC:241?source=stitcher-sunset",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3Cct7ZWmxHNAtLgBTqjC5v",
"rss": "https://snap.feed.snapjudgment.org/"
}
},
"soldout": {
"id": "soldout",
"title": "SOLD OUT: Rethinking Housing in America",
"tagline": "A new future for housing",
"info": "Sold Out: Rethinking Housing in America",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Sold-Out-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Sold Out: Rethinking Housing in America",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/soldout",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 13
},
"link": "/podcasts/soldout",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/911586047/s-o-l-d-o-u-t-a-new-future-for-housing",
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/introducing-sold-out-rethinking-housing-in-america/id1531354937",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/soldout",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/38dTBSk2ISFoPiyYNoKn1X",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/sold-out-rethinking-housing-in-america",
"tunein": "https://tunein.com/radio/SOLD-OUT-Rethinking-Housing-in-America-p1365871/"
}
},
"spooked": {
"id": "spooked",
"title": "Spooked",
"tagline": "True-life supernatural stories",
"info": "",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Spooked-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Spooked",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://spookedpodcast.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 7
},
"link": "https://spookedpodcast.org/",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/spooked/id1279361017",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/549547848/snap-judgment-presents-spooked",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/76571Rfl3m7PLJQZKQIGCT",
"rss": "https://feeds.simplecast.com/TBotaapn"
}
},
"tech-nation": {
"id": "tech-nation",
"title": "Tech Nation Radio Podcast",
"info": "Tech Nation is a weekly public radio program, hosted by Dr. Moira Gunn. Founded in 1993, it has grown from a simple interview show to a multi-faceted production, featuring conversations with noted technology and science leaders, and a weekly science and technology-related commentary.",
"airtime": "FRI 10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Tech-Nation-Radio-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://technation.podomatic.com/",
"meta": {
"site": "science",
"source": "Tech Nation Media"
},
"link": "/radio/program/tech-nation",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://technation.podomatic.com/rss2.xml"
}
},
"ted-radio-hour": {
"id": "ted-radio-hour",
"title": "TED Radio Hour",
"info": "The TED Radio Hour is a journey through fascinating ideas, astonishing inventions, fresh approaches to old problems, and new ways to think and create.",
"airtime": "SUN 3pm-4pm, SAT 10pm-11pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/tedRadioHour.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/?showDate=2018-06-22",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/ted-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/8vsS",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=523121474&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/TED-Radio-Hour-p418021/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510298/podcast.xml"
}
},
"thebay": {
"id": "thebay",
"title": "The Bay",
"tagline": "Local news to keep you rooted",
"info": "Host Devin Katayama walks you through the biggest story of the day with reporters and newsmakers.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Bay-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Bay",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/thebay",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 2
},
"link": "/podcasts/thebay",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bay/id1350043452",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/d800ea4c-7a2c-42f2-b861-edaf78a5db0b/the-bay",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/586725995/the-bay",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-bay",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/4BIKBKIujizLHlIlBNaAqQ",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC8259786327"
}
},
"thelatest": {
"id": "thelatest",
"title": "The Latest",
"tagline": "Trusted local news in real time",
"info": "",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/The-Latest-2025-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Latest",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/thelatest",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 6
},
"link": "/thelatest",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-latest-from-kqed/id1197721799",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/1257949365/the-latest-from-k-q-e-d",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/5KIIXMgM9GTi5AepwOYvIZ?si=bd3053fec7244dba",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC9137121918"
}
},
"theleap": {
"id": "theleap",
"title": "The Leap",
"tagline": "What if you closed your eyes, and jumped?",
"info": "Stories about people making dramatic, risky changes, told by award-winning public radio reporter Judy Campbell.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Leap-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Leap",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/theleap",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 17
},
"link": "/podcasts/theleap",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-leap/id1046668171",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/447248267/the-leap",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-leap",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3sSlVHHzU0ytLwuGs1SD1U",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/programs/the-leap/feed/podcast"
}
},
"the-moth-radio-hour": {
"id": "the-moth-radio-hour",
"title": "The Moth Radio Hour",
"info": "Since its launch in 1997, The Moth has presented thousands of true stories, told live and without notes, to standing-room-only crowds worldwide. Moth storytellers stand alone, under a spotlight, with only a microphone and a roomful of strangers. The storyteller and the audience embark on a high-wire act of shared experience which is both terrifying and exhilarating. Since 2008, The Moth podcast has featured many of our favorite stories told live on Moth stages around the country. For information on all of our programs and live events, visit themoth.org.",
"airtime": "SAT 8pm-9pm and SUN 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/theMoth.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://themoth.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "prx"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-moth-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-moth-podcast/id275699983?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/The-Moth-p273888/",
"rss": "http://feeds.themoth.org/themothpodcast"
}
},
"the-new-yorker-radio-hour": {
"id": "the-new-yorker-radio-hour",
"title": "The New Yorker Radio Hour",
"info": "The New Yorker Radio Hour is a weekly program presented by the magazine's editor, David Remnick, and produced by WNYC Studios and The New Yorker. Each episode features a diverse mix of interviews, profiles, storytelling, and an occasional burst of humor inspired by the magazine, and shaped by its writers, artists, and editors. This isn't a radio version of a magazine, but something all its own, reflecting the rich possibilities of audio storytelling and conversation. Theme music for the show was composed and performed by Merrill Garbus of tUnE-YArDs.",
"airtime": "SAT 10am-11am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-New-Yorker-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/tnyradiohour",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-new-yorker-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1050430296",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/WNYC-Podcasts/New-Yorker-Radio-Hour-p803804/",
"rss": "https://feeds.feedburner.com/newyorkerradiohour"
}
},
"the-sam-sanders-show": {
"id": "the-sam-sanders-show",
"title": "The Sam Sanders Show",
"info": "One of public radio's most dynamic voices, Sam Sanders helped launch The NPR Politics Podcast and hosted NPR's hit show It's Been A Minute. Now, the award-winning host returns with something brand new, The Sam Sanders Show. Every week, Sam Sanders and friends dig into the culture that shapes our lives: what's driving the biggest trends, how artists really think, and even the memes you can't stop scrolling past. Sam is beloved for his way of unpacking the world and bringing you up close to fresh currents and engaging conversations. The Sam Sanders Show is smart, funny and always a good time.",
"airtime": "FRI 12-1pm AND SAT 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/The-Sam-Sanders-Show-Podcast-Tile-400x400-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.kcrw.com/shows/the-sam-sanders-show/latest",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "KCRW"
},
"link": "https://www.kcrw.com/shows/the-sam-sanders-show/latest",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://feed.cdnstream1.com/zjb/feed/download/ac/28/59/ac28594c-e1d0-4231-8728-61865cdc80e8.xml"
}
},
"the-splendid-table": {
"id": "the-splendid-table",
"title": "The Splendid Table",
"info": "\u003cem>The Splendid Table\u003c/em> hosts our nation's conversations about cooking, sustainability and food culture.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Splendid-Table-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.splendidtable.org/",
"airtime": "SUN 10-11 pm",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-splendid-table"
},
"this-american-life": {
"id": "this-american-life",
"title": "This American Life",
"info": "This American Life is a weekly public radio show, heard by 2.2 million people on more than 500 stations. Another 2.5 million people download the weekly podcast. It is hosted by Ira Glass, produced in collaboration with Chicago Public Media, delivered to stations by PRX The Public Radio Exchange, and has won all of the major broadcasting awards.",
"airtime": "SAT 12pm-1pm, 7pm-8pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/thisAmericanLife.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.thisamericanlife.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "wbez"
},
"link": "/radio/program/this-american-life",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=201671138&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"rss": "https://www.thisamericanlife.org/podcast/rss.xml"
}
},
"tinydeskradio": {
"id": "tinydeskradio",
"title": "Tiny Desk Radio",
"info": "We're bringing the best of Tiny Desk to the airwaves, only on public radio.",
"airtime": "SUN 8pm and SAT 9pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/300x300-For-Member-Station-Logo-Tiny-Desk-Radio-@2x.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/series/g-s1-52030/tiny-desk-radio",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/tinydeskradio",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/g-s1-52030/rss.xml"
}
},
"wait-wait-dont-tell-me": {
"id": "wait-wait-dont-tell-me",
"title": "Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me!",
"info": "Peter Sagal and Bill Kurtis host the weekly NPR News quiz show alongside some of the best and brightest news and entertainment personalities.",
"airtime": "SUN 10am-11am, SAT 11am-12pm, SAT 6pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Wait-Wait-Podcast-Tile-300x300-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/wait-wait-dont-tell-me/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/wait-wait-dont-tell-me",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/Xogv",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=121493804&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Wait-Wait-Dont-Tell-Me-p46/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/344098539/podcast.xml"
}
},
"weekend-edition-saturday": {
"id": "weekend-edition-saturday",
"title": "Weekend Edition Saturday",
"info": "Weekend Edition Saturday wraps up the week's news and offers a mix of analysis and features on a wide range of topics, including arts, sports, entertainment, and human interest stories. The two-hour program is hosted by NPR's Peabody Award-winning Scott Simon.",
"airtime": "SAT 5am-10am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Weekend-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/weekend-edition-saturday/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/weekend-edition-saturday"
},
"weekend-edition-sunday": {
"id": "weekend-edition-sunday",
"title": "Weekend Edition Sunday",
"info": "Weekend Edition Sunday features interviews with newsmakers, artists, scientists, politicians, musicians, writers, theologians and historians. The program has covered news events from Nelson Mandela's 1990 release from a South African prison to the capture of Saddam Hussein.",
"airtime": "SUN 5am-10am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Weekend-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/weekend-edition-sunday/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/weekend-edition-sunday"
}
},
"racesReducer": {},
"racesGenElectionReducer": {},
"racesGenElection2026Reducer": {},
"radioSchedulesReducer": {},
"listsReducer": {
"posts/news?tag=sam-altman": {
"isFetching": false,
"latestQuery": {
"from": 0,
"postsToRender": 9
},
"tag": null,
"vitalsOnly": true,
"totalRequested": 9,
"isLoading": false,
"isLoadingMore": true,
"total": {
"value": 22,
"relation": "eq"
},
"items": [
"news_12085236",
"news_12084062",
"news_12083612",
"news_12083278",
"news_12083224",
"news_12082064",
"news_12081916",
"news_12081798",
"news_12081603"
]
}
},
"recallGuideReducer": {
"intros": {},
"policy": {},
"candidates": {}
},
"savedArticleReducer": {
"articles": [],
"status": {}
},
"pfsSessionReducer": {},
"subscriptionsReducer": {},
"termsReducer": {
"about": {
"name": "About",
"type": "terms",
"id": "about",
"slug": "about",
"link": "/about",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"arts": {
"name": "Arts & Culture",
"grouping": [
"arts",
"pop",
"trulyca"
],
"description": "KQED Arts provides daily in-depth coverage of the Bay Area's music, art, film, performing arts, literature and arts news, as well as cultural commentary and criticism.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "arts",
"slug": "arts",
"link": "/arts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"artschool": {
"name": "Art School",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "artschool",
"slug": "artschool",
"link": "/artschool",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"bayareabites": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "bayareabites",
"slug": "bayareabites",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"bayareahiphop": {
"name": "Bay Area Hiphop",
"type": "terms",
"id": "bayareahiphop",
"slug": "bayareahiphop",
"link": "/bayareahiphop",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"campaign21": {
"name": "Campaign 21",
"type": "terms",
"id": "campaign21",
"slug": "campaign21",
"link": "/campaign21",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"checkplease": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "checkplease",
"slug": "checkplease",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"education": {
"name": "Education",
"grouping": [
"education"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "education",
"slug": "education",
"link": "/education",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"elections": {
"name": "Elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "elections",
"slug": "elections",
"link": "/elections",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"events": {
"name": "Events",
"type": "terms",
"id": "events",
"slug": "events",
"link": "/events",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"event": {
"name": "Event",
"alias": "events",
"type": "terms",
"id": "event",
"slug": "event",
"link": "/event",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"filmschoolshorts": {
"name": "Film School Shorts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "filmschoolshorts",
"slug": "filmschoolshorts",
"link": "/filmschoolshorts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"food": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "food",
"slug": "food",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"forum": {
"name": "Forum",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/forum?",
"parent": "news",
"type": "terms",
"id": "forum",
"slug": "forum",
"link": "/forum",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"futureofyou": {
"name": "Future of You",
"grouping": [
"science",
"futureofyou"
],
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "futureofyou",
"slug": "futureofyou",
"link": "/futureofyou",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"jpepinheart": {
"name": "KQED food",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/food,bayareabites,checkplease",
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "jpepinheart",
"slug": "jpepinheart",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"liveblog": {
"name": "Live Blog",
"type": "terms",
"id": "liveblog",
"slug": "liveblog",
"link": "/liveblog",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"livetv": {
"name": "Live TV",
"parent": "tv",
"type": "terms",
"id": "livetv",
"slug": "livetv",
"link": "/livetv",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"lowdown": {
"name": "The Lowdown",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/lowdown?",
"parent": "news",
"type": "terms",
"id": "lowdown",
"slug": "lowdown",
"link": "/lowdown",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"mindshift": {
"name": "Mindshift",
"parent": "news",
"description": "MindShift explores the future of education by highlighting the innovative – and sometimes counterintuitive – ways educators and parents are helping all children succeed.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "mindshift",
"slug": "mindshift",
"link": "/mindshift",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"news": {
"name": "News",
"grouping": [
"news",
"forum"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "news",
"slug": "news",
"link": "/news",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"perspectives": {
"name": "Perspectives",
"parent": "radio",
"type": "terms",
"id": "perspectives",
"slug": "perspectives",
"link": "/perspectives",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"podcasts": {
"name": "Podcasts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "podcasts",
"slug": "podcasts",
"link": "/podcasts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"pop": {
"name": "Pop",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "pop",
"slug": "pop",
"link": "/pop",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"pressroom": {
"name": "Pressroom",
"type": "terms",
"id": "pressroom",
"slug": "pressroom",
"link": "/pressroom",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"quest": {
"name": "Quest",
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "quest",
"slug": "quest",
"link": "/quest",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"radio": {
"name": "Radio",
"grouping": [
"forum",
"perspectives"
],
"description": "Listen to KQED Public Radio – home of Forum and The California Report – on 88.5 FM in San Francisco, 89.3 FM in Sacramento, 88.3 FM in Santa Rosa and 88.1 FM in Martinez.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "radio",
"slug": "radio",
"link": "/radio",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"root": {
"name": "KQED",
"image": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"imageWidth": 1200,
"imageHeight": 630,
"headData": {
"title": "KQED | News, Radio, Podcasts, TV | Public Media for Northern California",
"description": "KQED provides public radio, television, and independent reporting on issues that matter to the Bay Area. We’re the NPR and PBS member station for Northern California."
},
"type": "terms",
"id": "root",
"slug": "root",
"link": "/root",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"science": {
"name": "Science",
"grouping": [
"science",
"futureofyou"
],
"description": "KQED Science brings you award-winning science and environment coverage from the Bay Area and beyond.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "science",
"slug": "science",
"link": "/science",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"stateofhealth": {
"name": "State of Health",
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "stateofhealth",
"slug": "stateofhealth",
"link": "/stateofhealth",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"support": {
"name": "Support",
"type": "terms",
"id": "support",
"slug": "support",
"link": "/support",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"thedolist": {
"name": "The Do List",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "thedolist",
"slug": "thedolist",
"link": "/thedolist",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"trulyca": {
"name": "Truly CA",
"grouping": [
"arts",
"pop",
"trulyca"
],
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "trulyca",
"slug": "trulyca",
"link": "/trulyca",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"tv": {
"name": "TV",
"type": "terms",
"id": "tv",
"slug": "tv",
"link": "/tv",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"voterguide": {
"name": "Voter Guide",
"parent": "elections",
"alias": "elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "voterguide",
"slug": "voterguide",
"link": "/voterguide",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"guiaelectoral": {
"name": "Guia Electoral",
"parent": "elections",
"alias": "elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "guiaelectoral",
"slug": "guiaelectoral",
"link": "/guiaelectoral",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"news_33543": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33543",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33543",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Sam Altman",
"slug": "sam-altman",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Sam Altman | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null,
"metaRobotsNoIndex": "noindex",
"imageData": {
"ogImageSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"width": 1200,
"height": 630
},
"twImageSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png"
},
"twitterCard": "summary_large_image"
}
},
"ttid": 33560,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/sam-altman"
},
"source_news_12085236": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12085236",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Close All Tabs",
"link": "https://www.kqed.org/podcasts/closealltabs",
"isLoading": false
},
"news_35082": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_35082",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "35082",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Close All Tabs",
"slug": "close-all-tabs",
"taxonomy": "program",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Close All Tabs | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 35099,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/close-all-tabs"
},
"news_33520": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33520",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33520",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Podcast",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Podcast Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33537,
"slug": "podcast",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/podcast"
},
"news_25184": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_25184",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "25184",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "AI",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "AI Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 25201,
"slug": "ai",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/ai"
},
"news_34755": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34755",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34755",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "artificial intelligence",
"slug": "artificial-intelligence",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "artificial intelligence | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34772,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/artificial-intelligence"
},
"news_22973": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_22973",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "22973",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "culture",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "culture Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 22990,
"slug": "culture",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/culture"
},
"news_3897": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_3897",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "3897",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Elon Musk",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Elon Musk Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 3916,
"slug": "elon-musk",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/elon-musk"
},
"news_3137": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_3137",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "3137",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "internet",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "internet Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 3155,
"slug": "internet",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/internet"
},
"news_34646": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34646",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34646",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "internet culture",
"slug": "internet-culture",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "internet culture | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34663,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/internet-culture"
},
"news_33732": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33732",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33732",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Technology",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Technology Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33749,
"slug": "technology",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/technology"
},
"news_6188": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_6188",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "6188",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Law and Justice",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Law and Justice Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6212,
"slug": "law-and-justice",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/law-and-justice"
},
"news_28250": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28250",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28250",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Local",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Local Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28267,
"slug": "local",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/local"
},
"news_8": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_8",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "8",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "News",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "News Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 8,
"slug": "news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/news"
},
"news_248": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_248",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "248",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Technology",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Technology Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 256,
"slug": "technology",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/technology"
},
"news_1386": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1386",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1386",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Bay Area",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Bay Area Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 1398,
"slug": "bay-area",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/bay-area"
},
"news_32668": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_32668",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "32668",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "ChatGPT",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "ChatGPT Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 32685,
"slug": "chatgpt",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/chatgpt"
},
"news_34054": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34054",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34054",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "oakland",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "oakland Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 34071,
"slug": "oakland",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/oakland"
},
"news_33542": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33542",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33542",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "OpenAI",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "OpenAI Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33559,
"slug": "openai",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/openai"
},
"news_34586": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34586",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34586",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Silicon Valley",
"slug": "silicon-valley",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Silicon Valley | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34603,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/silicon-valley"
},
"news_1631": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1631",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1631",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Technology",
"slug": "technology",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Technology | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 1643,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/technology"
},
"news_33733": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33733",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33733",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "News",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "News Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33750,
"slug": "news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/news"
},
"news_33730": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33730",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33730",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Oakland",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Oakland Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33747,
"slug": "oakland",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/oakland"
},
"news_31795": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_31795",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "31795",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 31812,
"slug": "california",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/california"
},
"news_21891": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_21891",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "21891",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "lawsuits",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "lawsuits Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 21908,
"slug": "lawsuits",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/lawsuits"
},
"news_27626": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_27626",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "27626",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "featured-news",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "featured-news Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 27643,
"slug": "featured-news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/featured-news"
},
"news_19954": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_19954",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "19954",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Law and Justice",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Law and Justice Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 19971,
"slug": "law-and-justice",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/law-and-justice"
},
"news_34167": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34167",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34167",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Criminal Justice",
"slug": "criminal-justice",
"taxonomy": "category",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Criminal Justice Archives | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34184,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/criminal-justice"
},
"news_17725": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17725",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17725",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "criminal justice",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "criminal justice Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 17759,
"slug": "criminal-justice",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/criminal-justice"
},
"news_22434": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_22434",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "22434",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "death",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "death Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 22451,
"slug": "death",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/death"
},
"news_35784": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_35784",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "35784",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "gun violence",
"slug": "gun-violence",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "gun violence | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 35801,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/gun-violence"
},
"news_38": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_38",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "38",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "San Francisco",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "San Francisco Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 58,
"slug": "san-francisco",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/san-francisco"
},
"news_33745": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33745",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33745",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Criminal Justice",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Criminal Justice Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33762,
"slug": "criminal-justice",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/criminal-justice"
},
"news_33729": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33729",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33729",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "San Francisco",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "San Francisco Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33746,
"slug": "san-francisco",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/san-francisco"
},
"news_57": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_57",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "57",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Tesla",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Tesla Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 57,
"slug": "tesla",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/tesla"
},
"news_18352": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_18352",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "18352",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "East Bay",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "East Bay Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 18386,
"slug": "east-bay",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/east-bay"
}
},
"userAgentReducer": {
"userAgent": "Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com)",
"isBot": true
},
"userPermissionsReducer": {
"wpLoggedIn": false
},
"localStorageReducer": {},
"browserHistoryReducer": [],
"eventsReducer": {},
"fssReducer": {},
"tvDailyScheduleReducer": {},
"tvWeeklyScheduleReducer": {},
"tvPrimetimeScheduleReducer": {},
"tvMonthlyScheduleReducer": {},
"userAccountReducer": {
"user": {
"email": null,
"emailStatus": "EMAIL_UNVALIDATED",
"loggedStatus": "LOGGED_OUT",
"loggingChecked": false,
"articles": [],
"firstName": null,
"lastName": null,
"phoneNumber": null,
"fetchingMembership": false,
"membershipError": false,
"memberships": [
{
"id": null,
"startDate": null,
"firstName": null,
"lastName": null,
"familyNumber": null,
"memberNumber": null,
"memberSince": null,
"expirationDate": null,
"pfsEligible": false,
"isSustaining": false,
"membershipLevel": "Prospect",
"membershipStatus": "Non Member",
"lastGiftDate": null,
"renewalDate": null,
"lastDonationAmount": null
}
]
},
"authModal": {
"isOpen": false,
"view": "LANDING_VIEW"
},
"error": null
},
"youthMediaReducer": {},
"checkPleaseReducer": {
"filterData": {
"region": {
"key": "Restaurant Region",
"filters": [
"Any Region"
]
},
"cuisine": {
"key": "Restaurant Cuisine",
"filters": [
"Any Cuisine"
]
}
},
"restaurantDataById": {},
"restaurantIdsSorted": [],
"error": null
},
"location": {
"pathname": "/news/tag/sam-altman",
"previousPathname": "/"
}
}
