It is not only OpenAI but the AI race itself that was vindicated in the California courtroom last night . Even though Elon Musk essentially lost on a technicality, there's a clear signal from the verdict that making lots of money from AI and competing fiercely with rivals is simply business. The industry sometimes tries to display a united front, especially when it comes to safety, research and inclusivity. But this case served as a powerful reminder that none of the AI giants are charities and don't have to be, even if they once said otherwise. Cracks in the façade of industry collaboration for the sake of humanity have been exposed before.

On Monday morning, a jury in Oakland, California, announced its verdict in one of the most-watched tech feuds between billionaire Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. The nine-member jury handed a decisive victory to Altman, saying Musk had waited too long to bring his claims against the artificial intelligence company and its top executives. Musk, who cofounded OpenAI as a nonprofit, had filed a $150bn lawsuit against the organisation, Altman and its president, Greg Brockman, accusing them of turning it into a for-profit entity for personal enrichment. Instead, the case became focused on a procedural issue. After deliberating for less than two hours, the jury unanimously found that the statute of limitations had expired before Musk filed the lawsuit in 2024, meaning jurors concluded he had waited too long to bring his claims under the applicable legal deadline.

Elon Musk loses case against Sam Altman over OpenAI's overhaul Elon Musk arrives at the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building for court in Oakland, California on April 30. A jury rejected Elon Musk's claims that OpenAI under Sam Altman's leadership betrayed its mission to benefit the public by morphing into a for-profit business, finding that he waited too long to sue the company. The verdict reached Monday in federal court in Oakland, California, follows a trial over the bitter feud between the entrepreneurs who worked together to launch the startup in 2015. OpenAI has since evolved into one of the world's most valuable and powerful artificial intelligence companies. "I think there is a substantial amount of evidence to support the jury's findings," U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said when she accepted the nine-member jury's unanimous conclusion after about two hours of deliberations.

Automated systems built on artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly deployed across high-stakes domains, raising critical concerns about fairness and the perpetuation of demographic disparities that exist in the world. In this context, causal inference provides a principled framework for reasoning about fairness, as it links observed disparities to underlying mechanisms and aligns naturally with human intuition and legal notions of discrimination. Prior work on causal fairness primarily focuses on the standard machine learning setting, where a decision-maker constructs a single predictive mechanism $f_{\widehat Y}$ for an outcome variable $Y$, while inheriting the causal mechanisms of all other covariates from the real world. The generative AI setting, however, is markedly more complex: generative models can sample from arbitrary conditionals over any set of variables, implicitly constructing their own beliefs about all causal mechanisms rather than learning a single predictive function. This fundamental difference requires new developments in causal fairness methodology. We formalize the problem of causal fairness in generative AI and unify it with the standard ML setting under a common theoretical framework. We then derive new causal decomposition results that enable granular quantification of fairness impacts along both (a) different causal pathways and (b) the replacement of real-world mechanisms by the generative model's mechanisms. We establish identification conditions and introduce efficient estimators for causal quantities of interest, and demonstrate the value of our methodology by analyzing race and gender bias in large language models across different datasets.

Elon Musk, left, and Sam Altman. Elon Musk, left, and Sam Altman. How Sam Altman's victory over Elon Musk clears way for OpenAI's trillion-dollar ambitions OpenAI's plans now seem all but guaranteed, given that the world's richest man couldn't put a stop to them On Monday morning, a jury in Oakland, California, handed a resounding victory to Sam Altman and OpenAI in their long, bitter courtroom battle with Elon Musk. The federal jury found Altman, OpenAI and its president, Greg Brockman, not liable for Elon Musk's claims that they unjustly enriched themselves and broke a founding contract made with Musk when founding the startup. The unanimous verdict, delivered after less than two hours of deliberation, is a stark rebuke of Musk and his lawyer's claims that Altman "stole a charity" through his leadership of OpenAI.

The federal jury in Oakland, California, found Altman, OpenAI and its president, Greg Brockman, not liable for Elon Musk's claims that they unjustly enriched themselves and broke a founding contract made with Musk when founding the startup. The verdict, delivered after less than two hours of deliberation, is a stark rebuke of Musk and his lawyer's claims that Altman "stole a charity" through his leadership of OpenAI . It also provides the AI firm with a clear path ahead to pursue going public later this year at about a $1tn valuation . The jury's finding is a non-binding, advisory verdict that left Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers with ultimate power to issue her own ruling in the case. Gonzalez Rogers immediately said that she would agree with the jury's decision and dismissed Musk's claims.

A California jury has tossed out Elon Musk's high-profile lawsuit against OpenAI and its boss Sam Altman. In a unanimous verdict, the case was thrown out because Musk had filed his lawsuit after a statute of limitations to bring such claims had expired. Musk had accused Altman of breaching a non-profit contract by shifting the ChatGPT-maker to a for-profit company after Musk donated $38m (£28.5m). Musk had argued Altman deceived him by accepting his money and then reneging on OpenAI's original non-profit mission to develop artificial intelligence (AI) technology for the benefit of humanity. Jurors spent three weeks viewing internal correspondence and hearing testimony, and arrived at a verdict on Monday after deliberating for roughly two hours.

A United States jury has ruled against Elon Musk in his lawsuit against OpenAI, finding the artificial intelligence (AI) company not liable to the world's richest person for having allegedly strayed from its original mission to benefit humanity. In a unanimous verdict on Monday, the jury in Oakland, California US federal court said Musk had brought his case too late. Following the verdict, Musk's lawyer said he reserved the right to appeal, but the judge suggested he may have an uphill battle because whether the statute of limitations ran out before Musk sued was a factual issue. "There's a substantial amount of evidence to support the jury's finding, which is why I was prepared to dismiss on the spot," US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said. Musk was a co-founder of OpenAI, the company that launched in 2015 and went on to create ChatGPT.

After three weeks of testimony and not much deliberation, a jury has ruled against Elon Musk, finding that Sam Altman and Greg Brockman were not liable in the case. The jury found that the statute of limitations had already passed when Musk sued the two executives. Musk filed his lawsuit in 2024, accusing them of stealing a charity following his departure from the AI lab in 2018. Though the jury in the case served only an advisory role, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers agreed with the jury's ruling. Musk's claims of breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment are dismissed as untimely, she said according to Though Musk could still appeal the ruling, Rogers told his lawyer she would dismiss an appeal on the spot.

The nine-member panel took only two hours to return a verdict in favor of OpenAI on Monday, which the judge quickly adopted as her own final decision. Elon Musk suffered the worst defeat possible in his legal battle against OpenAI as a federal jury and a judge ruled he waited too long to bring his claims against the AI startup and its top executives, Sam Altman and Greg Brockman. The jury's decision was a nonbinding recommendation sent to US district judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, though she immediately accepted it on Monday as her own, making it final. The nine-member panel delivered the unanimous verdict in an Oakland, California courtroom after deliberating for under two hours. They found that statutes of limitations expired well before Musk filed his lawsuit in 2024.