OpenAI has pushed back against Elon Musk in a new blog post titled “The truth Elon left out,” as the two prepare for a high-stakes jury trial set to begin in April. The post comes amid a escalating public and legal battle over Musk’s departure from the AI company he co-founded in 2015. Musk has been using recently unsealed court documents to challenge OpenAI’s leadership on his social media platform, X. In response, OpenAI published a detailed rebuttal that includes excerpts from internal communications and court filings, aiming to counter Musk’s narrative and shape public perception. The blog alleges that Musk sought full control of OpenAI, driven by past frustrations over not having it during his time at Tesla and SpaceX. According to OpenAI, Musk raised the idea of allowing his children to inherit control of artificial general intelligence (AGI)—a central point in the lawsuit—during private discussions about succession planning. The company says this suggestion came as a surprise to its leadership and contradicted the original mission of OpenAI as a nonprofit focused on safe and beneficial AI. The dispute centers on Musk’s claim that OpenAI deviated from its founding principles by transitioning to a for-profit public benefit corporation in October 2025, after initially operating as a nonprofit with a for-profit subsidiary. Musk alleges he was misled when he donated $38 million to the nonprofit arm and believed the company would remain committed to open, non-commercial AI development. OpenAI argues that the shift was necessary to attract investment and scale its operations, enabling it to compete with other major AI labs. The company maintains that its mission remains intact, even as it operates under a for-profit structure. Last Tuesday, over 100 documents from the case were unsealed, including personal diary entries from Greg Brockman, OpenAI’s president. One entry revealed Brockman’s internal doubts about the company’s commitment to a nonprofit model: “Cannot say that we are committed to the non-profit. Don’t want to say that we’re committed. If three months later we’re doing b-corp then it was a lie.” U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers referenced these entries in a recent ruling, concluding that Musk had presented sufficient evidence to justify proceeding to trial. The case will now move forward with a jury, where both sides will present their arguments on whether Musk was misled and whether OpenAI violated its fiduciary duties. Representatives for both Musk and OpenAI have not responded to requests for comment. As the legal showdown unfolds, the battle is increasingly playing out in the public eye, with both sides leveraging media and court documents to sway opinion.