Musk Attorney Questions Brockman on 2017 Journal Entries in OpenAI Trial

Elon Musk's attorney Steven Molo questioned OpenAI President and co-founder Greg Brockman on Monday in Oakland federal court about journal entries Brockman wrote in 2017. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers intervened at one point to tell Molo the questioning had become argumentative.

According to court documents, Brockman wrote in his 2017 digital journal that OpenAI had been thinking about flipping to a for-profit entity. He asked "What will take me to $1B?" in reference to financially reaching $1 billion by converting OpenAI to a for-profit entity. Brockman also wrote that making money for the team sounded great.

The same journal entries stated that turning OpenAI into a for-profit would require a very nasty fight and that it would be wrong to steal the nonprofit from Elon Musk, describing such an action as morally bankrupt. Brockman wrote that Elon Musk is not an idiot and his story would be that OpenAI was not honest about wanting to do the for-profit without him.

The journal entries first surfaced in court papers in January.

Brockman testified that shifting OpenAI to a for-profit was meant to serve the mission and that personal financial motivations were secondary. He stated that all agreed to create a for-profit and there was a fork in the road to either accept Elon Musk's terms or compete against him. Brockman testified that his stake in OpenAI is now worth nearly $30 billion.

Molo repeatedly told Brockman during testimony that the response was not his question. Before the trial, Elon Musk texted Greg Brockman two days earlier to gauge interest in settlement, according to OpenAI's attorneys. In the text, Elon Musk stated that by the end of this week, he and Sam Altman would be the most hated men in America if they insisted on proceeding.

Greg Brockman responded by suggesting both sides drop their respective claims.