‘Based on what I’ve seen…’: Judge 'doubts' Elon Musk's $134 billion damages claim against OpenAI

The judge overseeing Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft has doubts about his damages calculation. The judge presiding over Elon Musk's $134 billion lawsuit against OpenAI has said that his expert witness appeared to be “pulling numbers out of the air” but has declined to throw out the evidence, allowing it to proceed to a jury trial scheduled for April 28.The assessment came at a pre-trial hearing on Friday before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in California's Northern District, where lawyers for OpenAI had attempted to have the testimony of Musk's key damages expert thrown out before the trial even begins.

What the Judge said

Rogers did not hold back in her assessment of the damages analysis, according to a report by The Financial Times.“A jury is going to understand that [Musk's expert] is pulling these numbers out of the air,” she said at the hearing, adding: “Do I find it convincing? Not really.

Based on what I've seen, do I find it particularly persuasive? Not really.”Despite those reservations, Rogers declined to grant OpenAI's motion to exclude the testimony, saying she was unwilling to make such a consequential decision based on what she described as “a five-page motion.” “If I agreed to OpenAI's motion to exclude Musk's expert, this trial is done, because they have no evidence of damages, right?” she added.

What Elon Musk is actually claiming

Musk claims that OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman defrauded him by abandoning the company's founding mission as a non-profit AI research organisation. Musk co-founded OpenAI in 2015 alongside Altman and others, and provided substantial early funding and support. He left the board in 2018 following a clash with Altman. OpenAI has since grown into one of the most valuable companies in the world, with the for-profit arm recently valued at $730 billion.

The $134 billion damages figure is divided into two: $109 billion from OpenAI and $25 billion from Microsoft, and was calculated by expert witness C. Paul Wazzan, an economist at consulting firm Berkeley Research Group.

OpenAI's response

OpenAI's lawyers challenged Wazzan's methodology directly at Friday's hearing with its lawyer William Savitt arguing there was “no equation” by which Wazzan had actually arrived at his conclusions, questioning whether the analysis met the basic standards required of expert testimony in court.OpenAI has consistently maintained that the lawsuit is driven by commercial motives, accusing Musk of using litigation as a tool of competition, and has described his legal campaign as part of “an ongoing pattern of harassment.”