Steven Molo, Elon Musk's lead counsel, stood in front of the jury on Thursday and asked them to imagine standing at the edge of a wooden bridge over a gorge.

"There is a river 100 feet below and it looks a little scary," Molo said. "But a woman standing by the entry to the bridge says, 'Do not worry, the bridge is built on Sam Altman's version of the truth.'" He paused. "Would you walk across that bridge? I do not think many people would."

That was the central pitch of Musk's closing argument in the trial that could determine the future of OpenAI, the most valuable AI company on earth. After three weeks of testimony, the case is now heading to the jury.

What Musk Is Asking For

The numbers are staggering. Musk is seeking more than $150 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft, with any payout going to the OpenAI nonprofit. He also wants Sam Altman removed from the board and the company's 2025 conversion to a for-profit structure reversed. If he wins, it would be one of the largest legal judgments in corporate history and would throw OpenAI's planned IPO into chaos.

If he loses, Altman solidifies control of a company now valued at roughly $730 billion, and OpenAI moves forward with a data center expansion that could cost hundreds of billions.

Three Weeks of Testimony, One Core Question

Musk and Altman co-founded OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015, pledging to freely share its AI technology with the world. Musk left in 2018 after a power struggle. Four years later, ChatGPT launched and made OpenAI the most commercially successful AI company on the planet.

Musk's argument is simple: "It is not OK to steal a charity." His legal team spent the trial portraying Altman and OpenAI president Greg Brockman as operators who started with altruistic intentions, then abandoned them once the money got real. Molo pointed out that two former board members testified they removed Altman in November 2023 because they found him untrustworthy. He also highlighted Brockman's personal journal entry: "It would be nice to be making billions." Brockman's stake is now worth $30 billion.

OpenAI's defense countered that Musk himself had pushed for more funding and even suggested a for-profit structure before he left. They also argued the nonprofit still exists and controls the for-profit venture, which now has assets valued at $130 billion. As Molo put it in his rebuttal: "If you go and rob a bank and take $1 million, it is not a good argument to say 'I left $10 million in the bank.'"

The Statute of Limitations Problem

There is a critical procedural hurdle. The jury must decide whether Musk filed his lawsuit within the statute of limitations. The three-year window for breach of contract means Musk's team must prove he had no way of knowing OpenAI had breached its founding agreement before August 2021. If they cannot clear that bar, the rest of the case becomes moot.

Who Wins Either Way

A Musk victory would be a win for every OpenAI competitor: Google, Anthropic, xAI (Musk's own lab), and China's DeepSeek. It would freeze OpenAI's IPO plans and potentially unwind its corporate structure. A loss would clear the runway for what could be one of the largest public offerings in history.

Musk was not in the courtroom on Thursday. He was in China with President Trump. The jury does not know that, and it should not matter. What matters is whether twelve people in Oakland believe Sam Altman when he says OpenAI kept its promises. The answer to that question could redirect hundreds of billions of dollars.

Sources: The New York Times (live updates), Bloomberg Law, Business Insider, NPR