Closing arguments in Musk v. Altman ended with Elon Musk's attorney Steven Molo calling co-defendant Greg Brockman 'Greg Altman,' incorrectly stating Musk sought no monetary damages, and requiring correction from the judge on that point.
OpenAI's lawyer Sarah Eddy responded by presenting the company's evidence in straight chronological order. No theatrics. The contrast between the two performances was, by the reporter's account, stark enough to describe as a demolition derby.
The original piece is worth reading in full for its granular breakdown of what Musk's legal team actually argued versus what the evidence supported, and what the judge's courtroom corrections signal about how this case may land.
[READ ORIGINAL →]