Published: 6 May 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online
In a stunning moment of testimony at the Dellums Federal Building in Oakland, OpenAI President Greg Brockman told a jury on Tuesday that he feared a physical altercation with Elon Musk during the chaotic early days of the AI startup. The revelation came during the second week of the landmark trial between Musk and OpenAI, where the billionaire is seeking upwards of $150 billion in damages and the removal of CEO Sam Altman.
Brockman, a co-founder and key defendant, described a heated 2017 meeting where Musk reportedly “stormed out” after his demand for absolute control of the company was rejected. “I actually thought he was going to hit me,” Brockman testified, marking the most personal escalation yet in the “bitter feud” over the future of artificial intelligence.
The trial has shed light on the “clinical” breakdown of the relationship between Musk and the team he helped fund.
The Power Play: Brockman testified that Musk attempted to “seize majority control” of the board, offering a $1 billion funding commitment in exchange for the CEO title and the right to fold OpenAI into Tesla.
The “Mood Shift”: According to court documents, when Brockman and co-founder Ilya Sutskever refused the terms, Musk’s demeanor turned “volatile.”
The Model 3 Carrot: OpenAI attorneys showed text messages from August 2017 where Sutskever jokingly asked Brockman if a Tesla Model 3 would be enough to make him accept “massively unfavorable terms,” highlighting the asymmetric leverage Musk allegedly tried to use.
Musk’s lawsuit hinges on the claim that Altman and Brockman committed “accountability rot” by betraying OpenAI’s original charitable mission to enrich themselves.
The $50 Billion Computing Gap: Brockman countered this by testifying that OpenAI now requires $50 billion a year in computing power—a figure that would be a “national security emergency” for a standard charity. “A non-profit model could never have footed the bill for the safety research we are doing,” he argued.
The “Looting” Counter-Claim: Musk’s lead lawyer, Steven Molo, pointed to Brockman’s own diary entries from 2017, where the co-founder wrote that “stealing the non-profit from [Musk]” would be “morally bankrupt.” Brockman defended the entries as “deeply personal” writings from a time of transition.
The “Wolf and Sheep” Quote: Brockman also alleged that upon his departure in 2018, Musk told staff: “If the sheep are dictating safety and the wolves are not, then there’s no purpose,” suggesting Musk intended to ignore safety protocols to accelerate AI development within Tesla.
As King Charles concludes his Washington visit, where he emphasized “Ethical Tech Cooperation,” the Musk v. Altman trial has become a “milestone” for how the world views the “human-machine coordination” of Silicon Valley power players.
The Damages: Musk is asking for $134bn to $150bn to be redirected back to OpenAI’s non-profit arm, claiming the current $850 billion valuation of the company is “ill-gotten gains.”
The Competitive Edge: OpenAI’s legal team, led by William Savitt, has characterized the lawsuit as “jealousy” over OpenAI’s success, framing it as a “national security emergency” for Musk’s own rival lab, xAI.
As the RHS Wisley wisteria reaches its peak and the Southbank Centre celebrates 75 years of endurance, the “OpenAI Trial” has moved beyond legal technicalities into the realm of “personal pettiness.”
“Justice has no expiry date, but it certainly has a lot of receipts,” noted one legal observer in Oakland. With Sam Altman expected to take the stand next week, the “golden tone” of the early OpenAI partnership has been permanently replaced by a “clinical” battle for control.
With the King’s Speech on May 13 likely to reference “Digital Ethics,” the question of whether Musk was a “savior or a wolf” in the OpenAI story remains the central mystery of the most expensive court case in the history of Silicon Valley.




























































































