3 ms·
I think you are referring to a tweet on March 16th where he said "Btw, the proceeds of any legal victory in the OpenAI case will be donated to charity. I will i
by burkaman 5mo ago
I think you are referring to a tweet on March 16th where he said "Btw, the proceeds of any legal victory in the OpenAI case will be donated to charity. I will in no way enrich myself." Not during the trial, not a donation to OpenAI's charity, and obviously not meaningful given his track record of not following through on public statements.
- aeternum 5mo agoIt was official, he amended the lawsuit to codify it, read it for yourself: https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Musk-v-Altman-Amended-Notice-of-Remedies-4-7-26.pdf https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Musk-...
- matthewdgreen 5mo agoPutting it into a filing does not necessarily make it legally binding. I asked ChatGPT and (although it is clearly in the bag for OpenAI ;) it gave more color: https://chatgpt.com/share/6a0baf4a-e408-83ea-a44b-ff68bacb642a https://chatgpt.com/share/6a0baf4a-e408-83ea-a44b-ff68bacb64...
- burkaman 5mo agoThanks, couldn't find this. This is essentially a proposal to the court about how the case could be resolved though, not a promise, and he only proposed it after the judge denied his original proposal (https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Musk-v-Altman-Pretrial-Order-3-31-26.pdf https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Musk-...), which was "give me $134 billion". I think it would have been a little more credible if he had requested this originally. Even taking it at face value, it's just an idea for the judge to consider, not legally binding for anybody.