Judge criticizes Musk and Altman for 'gamesmanship' as AI feud escalates in court

A California federal judge has criticized both Elon Musk and Sam Altman for engaging in “gamesmanship” during their ongoing legal battle, marking another contentious chapter in their feud over artificial intelligence. In a brief but pointed ruling, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers addressed the escalating courtroom tactics between the two tech titans, emphasizing that the court would not tolerate excessive filings or procedural delays. The dispute stems from Musk’s 2024 racketeering lawsuit against Altman, OpenAI, and Microsoft. Musk alleges that OpenAI abandoned its nonprofit mission and colluded with Microsoft in a “self-dealing, unregulated merger” to gain unfair advantages in the AI market. He seeks damages and a court ruling to invalidate OpenAI’s licensing deal with Microsoft. Altman’s legal team, however, has pushed back aggressively, filing 55 affirmative defenses—a tactic that requires the defense to prove its claims at trial. Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Altman’s 55 defenses were “excessive” and “inappropriate,” reducing the number by 16. The dismissed claims included arguments that Musk’s case was time-barred, overly delayed, or invalid due to “Musk’s unclean hands.” The judge noted that many of these defenses were “insufficiently alleged, irrelevant, redundant, or immaterial.” She also rebuked Musk’s legal team for overreaching, stating they failed to “take the high road” by attempting to strike all of Altman’s defenses. This is not the first time the judge has expressed frustration with the case. At a February hearing, she questioned Musk’s assertion of “irreparable financial harm,” sarcastically remarking that the lawsuit involves “billionaires versus billionaires.” She also challenged Musk’s claim of a “likely restraint of trade” by noting his own company, xAI, had raised $11 billion in funding. Altman’s lawyers had previously argued that Musk’s attempt to dismiss all 55 defenses was a “tactical maneuver” to delay the trial. The judge’s decision, however, underscores her impatience with what she perceives as procedural posturing. She emphasized that the court’s resources should not be consumed by what she called “over-litigation.” The case, which has drawn significant attention due to the high-profile nature of the defendants, now moves forward with 39 affirmative defenses remaining for Altman’s side. Musk’s team has yet to respond to the reduced list, but both parties are expected to prepare for trial. Gonzalez Rogers has set a March 30 deadline for jury selection in her Oakland courtroom. The legal clash reflects broader tensions in the AI industry, where competition for dominance and control over emerging technologies has intensified. Musk, the CEO of Tesla and xAI, has long been a vocal critic of OpenAI and Microsoft, while Altman, the former president of OpenAI and current CEO of the newly formed AI company, has defended his organization’s actions. The judge’s ruling highlights the challenges of navigating complex legal disputes in a rapidly evolving field, where the stakes are high and the rules are still being defined. Both sides have faced scrutiny for their approach, with the court urging them to focus on substantive arguments rather than procedural maneuvering. As the case progresses, it remains to be seen whether the legal battle will yield clarity or further prolong the conflict between two of the most influential figures in tech.