total OpenAI – Sam Altman testified that Elon Musk wanted “total control” of OpenAI, including passing it to his children after he died.

Elon Musk’s push for “total control” of OpenAI, including the idea that the company’s control should pass to his children, surfaced during Sam Altman’s testimony in a closely watched federal trial.

Altman told jurors in Oakland. California. that nearly a decade ago—when Musk was still involved in running OpenAI—an intense debate over ownership resurfaced a question no one else seemed ready to answer.. As cofounders discussed Musk’s request for a controlling stake, someone asked what would happen after Musk died.. Altman said Musk replied that he hadn’t thought much about it. but suggested that control “should pass” to his children.. Altman told the nine-person jury that he did not feel comfortable with that plan.

The testimony comes as Musk v Altman continues into its third week in federal court. with the stakes extending well beyond personal grievances.. The case has been framed around competing interpretations of what OpenAI was meant to be—and whether the company’s later structure and partnerships betrayed its nonprofit origins.

Musk. who has taken OpenAI and Microsoft to court. is seeking to argue that their partnership amounts to a betrayal of OpenAI’s nonprofit beginnings.. In Tuesday’s session. Altman characterized Musk as someone pursuing both profit and power. telling the jury that Musk believed that if OpenAI became a for-profit entity. he needed to hold “total control” at the outset.

Altman testified that Musk’s rationale was rooted in trust and risk: Musk. Altman said. thought he could make non-obvious decisions better than others.. Altman added that he heard—either directly from Musk or from Musk’s former chief of staff—that for the rest of Musk’s career. he planned to work only on companies he could control.

Altman’s courtroom position was that OpenAI should not be governed by a single person.. He told jurors that part of the reason OpenAI was created was the belief that advanced artificial intelligence should not end up under the control of any one individual. regardless of how well-intentioned that person might be.

He also pushed back on Musk’s alleged promise to relinquish control later.. Altman said that while Musk claimed he would give up control at some point. he was not persuaded—arguing from experience that control often proves sticky once a company is performing well.. Altman told the jury that founders or controlling stakeholders typically do not relinquish control. potentially because they can end up keeping it indefinitely.

To illustrate that point, Altman cited SpaceX as an example of a “founder-controlled” technology company, pointing to a structure where the founding figure retains influence.

Altman was also dismissive when asked about Musk’s interest in absorbing OpenAI into Tesla. In his testimony, he characterized Tesla as a car company and said it does not share OpenAI’s mission.

The civil trial has become a defining moment in the dispute Altman and Musk brought to court over the company’s trajectory since OpenAI’s creation in 2015.. Musk has accused Altman and other OpenAI executives of stealing the “charity” Musk said he helped build. arguing that the organization’s nonprofit purpose was compromised.

During Tuesday’s exchange. when Musk’s attorney asked Altman directly whether he stole a charity. Altman responded by rejecting the framing as difficult to accept.. The judge presiding over the federal case heard Musk’s earlier testimony as well. including Musk’s assertion that he left the firm in 2018 and that he had poured tens of millions into OpenAI to support its founding mission as a nonprofit focused on benefiting the public.

Musk has alleged that while OpenAI’s nonprofit mission was the original intent. the partnership with Microsoft—also a named defendant—partly moved the firm away from that aim.. If Musk prevails. the outcome could reshape the broader artificial intelligence landscape. and the case could also carry significant financial consequences for OpenAI and Microsoft. with billions potentially at risk in damages.

Altman’s testimony followed a series of appearances by other major figures. The trial has already heard from OpenAI president and cofounder Greg Brockman and from Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, among others.

The courtroom narrative is also being contested outside the courtroom. In a prior post on X ahead of jury selection, OpenAI stated that Musk’s lawsuit has long been a baseless and jealous effort to derail a competitor, positioning the legal challenge as more personal than principled.

For investors and industry watchers, the dispute is not just about internal governance or historical intent.. It touches on how AI companies balance mission, control, and capital—especially once partnerships and funding models evolve.. As the jury weighs competing portrayals of what OpenAI should have become. the testimony about “total control” and who should hold it—forever or after death—adds a highly personal edge to an argument that could have long-term implications for how AI power is allocated.

Sam Altman Elon Musk OpenAI Microsoft AI trial corporate control nonprofit origins