OAKLAND, California, May 11, 2026, 14:14 PDT
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and ex-OpenAI Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever took the stand Monday, as Elon Musk’s civil suit against OpenAI neared its conclusion. Over several days, questions swirled around Shivon Zilis—Musk’s close adviser, former OpenAI board member, and mother to four of his children. Sutskever pegged his OpenAI stake at roughly $7 billion. Nadella described Microsoft’s early bet as a “calculated risk.” Reuters
This case carries weight: OpenAI, flush with fresh billions for computing gear and eyed by IPO-watchers, could see its governance reshaped. Elon Musk is demanding $150 billion in damages from both OpenAI and Microsoft, directing any payout to OpenAI’s charity arm, and pushing to steer the company back to nonprofit status, according to Reuters.
Time’s ticking too. NBC Bay Area noted the nine-person jury was picked on April 27 in Oakland federal court, where the trial’s underway. Closing arguments are scheduled for Thursday, May 14.
Zilis—a Neuralink executive who once sat on OpenAI’s board—has emerged as a central figure, positioned right at the intersection of Musk and OpenAI just as the company’s founders clashed over money, mission, and control. According to The Washington Post, Zilis called herself a “bridge” between Musk, Altman, Brockman, and Sutskever. Corporate governance specialist Alnoor Ebrahim from Tufts pointed out that such disputes aren’t really up to individuals to settle. The Washington Post
OpenAI’s legal team has argued that Zilis kept Musk in the loop after his departure from the company, but Zilis pushed back, saying she never acted as a secret conduit for sensitive details. Pressed on whether she relayed any information to Musk during her time on the board, Zilis shot back: “Funnel? Certainly not.” Jurors also saw a 2018 message where Musk urged her to maintain a “close and friendly” relationship with OpenAI, as he aimed to hire away some staff for Tesla, according to The Guardian. The Guardian
OpenAI brought up her relationship with Musk in court, arguing it posed a conflict. According to Business Insider, Zilis testified Musk agreed to be a sperm donor in 2020 or early 2021, their twins were conceived via IVF that year, and details stayed private until Texas court filings emerged in 2022. She insisted to the jury that her personal ties had no impact on her board responsibilities.
The hearing stirred up a wider debate over whether OpenAI’s top brass handled its mission responsibly as ChatGPT—a bot capable of spitting out text and code from user prompts—headed for a large-scale launch. On video, former tech chief Mira Murati said Altman sometimes misled people and was “creating chaos.” Board member Zilis told the court the group had expressed “extreme concern” about ChatGPT rolling out without keeping directors properly in the loop, according to Reuters. Reuters
Musk’s camp argues OpenAI broke its original nonprofit pledge, while OpenAI counters that Musk was open to a for-profit model—as long as he ran the show. According to testimony from OpenAI President Greg Brockman, Musk backed the for-profit shift back in 2017 but demanded control, partly to bankroll his Mars ambitions. Brockman said Musk told him he’d need $80 billion “to create a city,” per Reuters. Reuters
Zilis’ testimony revealed just how many options were on the table before things fell apart. According to Bloomberg Law, she told jurors that Musk actually floated the idea of giving Altman a Tesla board seat back in late 2017. That was also when OpenAI’s founders were wrestling with how to pay for the nonprofit’s compute demands.
The rivalry is right out in the open. OpenAI stands by its setup even as Musk ramps up xAI, and that initial OpenAI pitch? It was, at least in part, a move to offset Google DeepMind’s influence. “Only I am responsible enough” to steer AI safely—Sarah Myers West, co-executive director at the AI Now Institute, told Reuters that sentiment ran through those first governance debates. Reuters
Musk faces another hurdle even if he secures a liability win. As Business Insider points out, in this civil case, the jury determines if OpenAI, Altman, and Brockman are liable, but it falls to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to decide on any remedies. So, outcomes like booting executives or forcing OpenAI back to nonprofit status aren’t guaranteed.
Jurors now face a sharply defined question, thanks to Zilis’ testimony: Did OpenAI violate an original pledge, or is this just Musk grappling with losing his grip on a company that ballooned in value after his exit?
