Greg Brockman Testifies in Musk v Altman Trial Amid Scrutiny Over Journal Entries and Financial Ties
During the second week of proceedings, Brockman was cross-examined by Musk's counsel on discrepancies between his testimony and internal documents from circa 2017.
Greg Brockman, co-founder and former president of OpenAI, took the stand during the second week of the Musk v Altman trial. His testimony focused on the company's founding, which he described as a joint initiative with Sam Altman, while portraying Elon Musk as a distant figure who sought involvement only after the core team had assembled.
The proceedings featured an unusual sequence where Brockman was cross-examined before his direct examination. During this phase, he was questioned by Musk's attorney, Steven Molo, who highlighted discrepancies in Brockman's responses and his financial connections to entities including Cerebras, CoreWeave, Stripe, and Helion Energy.
Significant attention was drawn to journal entries from circa 2017 introduced as evidence. These documents suggested Brockman considered converting the organisation to a for-profit structure and expressed personal greed regarding the company's non-profit status. One entry noted that it would be wrong to steal the non-profit from Musk to convert to a B-Corp, while another suggested flipping to a for-profit model to make money.
A central point of contention arose when Molo questioned why Brockman had not donated $29 billion to OpenAI's non-profit arm, given his stake was valued at roughly $30 billion. Brockman failed to answer this direct question, instead offering explanations about the non-profit's stake in the for-profit entity that the lawyer deemed unresponsive.
Brockman's direct testimony characterised the founding of OpenAI as a collaboration between himself and Altman, with Musk appearing as a late addition. This narrative was contrasted with text messages from Ilya Sutskever to Brockman, which revealed concerns that Musk's involvement would create a very stressful work environment.
The trial continues to examine the credibility of both parties, with the jury tasked to weigh the evidence presented against the backdrop of a high-profile dispute over the governance and future of the artificial intelligence firm.
