Musk seeks up to $134 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft Corporation (MSFT.US)

The conflict between Musk and OpenAI, as well as its core partner Microsoft Corporation (MSFT.US), is escalating from ideological differences to a potential high-stakes lawsuit that could reshape the rules of the artificial intelligence (AI) industry. According to a document submitted to the U.S. Federal Court on Friday, Musk is claiming up to $134 billion from OpenAI and Microsoft Corporation, arguing that the two companies received "unjust enrichment" due to their early support and investment in OpenAI, and that these profits should be returned according to the law. In the complaint, Musk stated that since co-founding OpenAI in 2015, he not only provided around $38 million in funding, accounting for 60% of the early seed financing, but also played a decisive role in organization building, recruitment of key talents, strategic direction, and external credibility. The document cited expert witness, financial economist C. Paul Wazzan, who estimated the economic value gained by OpenAI through Musk's comprehensive contributions to be between $65.5 billion and $109.4 billion, and the estimated value of the relevant benefits Microsoft Corporation received through its deep relationship with OpenAI to be between $13.3 billion and $25.1 billion. Musk's side emphasized that this is not a typical dispute over investment returns, but a "systemic usurpation" of the original contribution value after OpenAI deviated from its non-profit mission and transitioned to a for-profit structure. Musk's chief attorney, Steven Molo, stated: "Without Musk, there would be no OpenAI. He provided not just funding, but the critical capabilities needed to build a scalable AI institution." OpenAI quickly responded, calling the lawsuit "baseless" and accusing Musk of launching a "harassment lawsuit" against them. Microsoft Corporation also stated that there is no evidence to suggest that they "assisted or instigated" OpenAI in violating its founding commitments. In another document submitted to the court, OpenAI and Microsoft Corporation jointly requested the judge to restrict the testimony of Musk's expert witness, stating that his valuation model is "fabricated, unverifiable, unprecedented," and warning that this is essentially an attempt to achieve an unreasonable transfer of funds. The core legal issue of the case is whether OpenAI's initial non-profit mission constitutes a legally binding commitment to the founders and subsequent partners. Musk believes that OpenAI, after introducing capital from Microsoft Corporation, establishing a commercialization model, and restructuring into a for-profit framework, fundamentally contradicted the original intention of "developing AI for the benefit of all humanity." On the other hand, OpenAI argues that its structural adjustments were made to ensure the sustainable development of the technology and did not constitute a legal breach. A federal judge in Oakland, California has ruled that the case will be heard by a jury, with the trial expected to begin in April of this year. If the jury supports Musk's claim, he may not only receive a substantial compensation but also seek further relief including punitive damages and court injunctions. Analysts point out that the impact of this case goes far beyond the parties involved. If the court accepts the logic that the "erosion of non-profit mission by commercialization triggers a return responsibility," it could have profound implications for the governance structure, capital introduction methods, and legal boundaries of donations for AI institutions globally. At the same time, Musk is currently operating the AI company xAI, which directly competes with ChatGPT, complicating the motivations behind his claim and the competitive landscape of the industry, further increasing the uncertainty of the case. This article is reprinted from "Cai Lianshe"; GMTEight editing: Chen Siyu.