The Musk v. Altman trial closed today, and it wasn't pretty for Team Musk. His lawyer, Steven Molo, had a rough day in court, mixing up names and getting basic facts wrong about what they were even asking for.
At one point Molo called co-defendant Greg Brockman "Greg Altman." He also told the judge Musk wasn't seeking money, which apparently wasn't accurate and required a correction from the bench. Not the kind of mistakes you want to make during closing arguments.
Molo's strategy seemed to be calling everyone liars without backing it up with much actual evidence for Musk's legal claims. Meanwhile, OpenAI's lawyer Sarah Eddy took a simpler approach: she just walked through all the evidence they'd introduced, arranged chronologically.
For anyone following the AI industry's power dynamics, this trial matters beyond the courtroom drama. It's essentially about whether Musk has any claim to OpenAI's direction after he left the company years ago.
The contrast in legal preparation here is stark. One side came with receipts organized neatly. The other side came with accusations and apparently not much else. We'll see how the judge weighs it all, but the closing arguments suggest which way this might go.
