It's explosive! Just now, OpenAI president Brockman confessed in court: he invested $0 and holds $30 billion worth of shares in OpenAI's profit-making arm (Musk donated $38 million and got nothing). What's even crazier is that Brockman and Altman quietly hold personal shares in Cerebras. Gary Marcus bluntly stated this is the closest Musk has been to winning.
Just now, OpenAI's president Greg Brockman 'pleaded guilty'?
He admitted in court that he never invested a single dime but extracted $30 billion in equity.
This news not only stunned everyone in the courtroom but also shocked all the netizens.
Hearing this explosive news, NYU scholar Marcus judged: I think Musk really has a chance to win for the first time.
In the courtroom, Musk's attorney was calm, holding Brockman's own diary and emails, elegantly conducting a 'live dissection'.
The most shocking moment of the day occurred.
When the lawyer asked about Brockman's stake in OpenAI's for-profit entity, the conversation went as follows.
Q: 'You have ownership interests in this for-profit company, correct?' Brockman: 'Yes, accurate.' Q: 'And to obtain these interests, your cash investment was $0. Correct?' Brockman (after hesitation): 'That is also accurate.' Q: 'Your equity in this for-profit entity, calculated at today's valuation, exceeds $20 billion, correct?' Brockman: 'Yes.' Q: 'In fact, it might be closer to $30 billion. Correct?' Brockman: 'I think that might be true. Yes.'
As that number echoed in the courtroom, a subtle stir arose from the audience.
It's important to note that Musk, as one of OpenAI's earliest funders, donated over $38 million in cash, provided early office space, and even personally recruited top talent.
But in today's OpenAI, Musk's personal stake is zero.
Not only that, but Brockman had to admit an embarrassing fact: he had used Musk's name for endorsements in early fundraising, even verbally promising a $100,000 donation, but in reality, he never fulfilled that promise.
This is precisely the core of Musk's accusations: unjust enrichment.
According to California's charitable trust law, trustees of non-profit organizations should receive salaries, not divvy up charitable assets.
Musk's logic is simple: I donated to create a public good that benefits humanity, and yet you took the public good apart, pocketed its components, and slapped a $30 billion label on it.
Cerebras: a $20 billion self-dealing transaction
If the $30 billion stake is the first bombshell in this trial, Cerebras is the second. The related transactions disclosed during the trial directly touched on legal red lines.
Musk's lawyer dug up an old account.
In 2017, while serving as a trustee for OpenAI, Brockman privately purchased shares in the AI chip startup Cerebras. Meanwhile, Ultraman also made a personal investment in the company.
However, in the following time, Brockman began to lobby crazily within OpenAI, prompting OpenAI to reach a deal with Cerebras.
The specific timeline is as follows.
December 2025: OpenAI signed an order to pay Cerebras $10 billion and additionally provided a loan of $1 billion.
February 2026: With massive orders from OpenAI, Cerebras' valuation skyrocketed from $8 billion to $23 billion, nearly tripling.
April 2026: OpenAI has increased its orders to $20 billion.
Now: Cerebras has officially filed for an IPO, with a valuation soaring to $26.6 billion.
The dialogue in court went as follows.
Q: When you discuss financial transactions between OpenAI and Cerebras, you are essentially a shareholder of Cerebras, correct? Brockman: 'There is some overlap between the discussions and being an investor in Cerebras. Yes.' Q: Can you point to an email informing Musk that you hold shares in Cerebras? While you were pushing for a transaction between OpenAI and Cerebras? Brockman: 'I don't believe there is such an email.' Q: What about chat logs? Brockman: 'None.' Q: Text messages? Brockman: 'None.' Q: However, if there is a transaction between OpenAI and Cerebras, you personally would profit? Brockman: 'I think so, but that wasn't something I was considering at the time.'
California's charitable trust law has a specific name for this: self-dealing. This kind of self-dealing is legally extremely lethal.
As the head of a non-profit organization, they leverage charitable funds to support their personal investment companies, achieving exponential growth in personal wealth.
This is no longer just a matter of 'deviating from the original intention', but involves serious violations of professional ethics and conflicts of interest.
This trial is essentially the ultimate collision of two Silicon Valley value systems.
One approach is the 'Old Testament idealism' represented by Musk: a promise is a promise, contracts must not be violated.
One approach is the 'pragmatic expansionism' represented by Ultraman: technology is iterating too quickly, survival comes first. To achieve AGI, any tweaks to legal structures and changes in profit distribution are justified.
And California law may lean towards the former.
In California, charitable assets are strictly protected. If you establish a charitable organization and then decide to turn it into a private company, you must undergo an extremely complex assessment and return the full asset value to the public.
What happens if Musk wins?
First, OpenAI may be forced to open-source its technology—this has always been Musk's demand.
Secondly, Microsoft's investment may be at risk. Musk is seeking to rescind the exclusive licensing agreement with Microsoft. If the court supports this request, OpenAI's valuation will collapse in an instant.
Third, the profits from OpenAI's for-profit division could be forcibly redirected back to the non-profit parent, making Brockman's $30 billion 'zero-cost equity' evaporate.
Ultimately, this ruling will set a precedent, warning all AI startups: you can't raise funds under the guise of charity, then reap profits under a commercial facade.
But if OpenAI wins, it means that Silicon Valley's 'barbaric growth' logic has triumphed once again—if you can create technology that changes the world, all the initial promises can be obscured by the glitter of success. $AI #OpenAI
