Greg Brockman journal makes court appearance and drops truth bombs about Musk and OpenAI

Greg Brockman's journals emerge as key evidence in Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI, raising questions over its shift from nonprofit to for-profit.

In Short

• Greg Brockman journals highlight internal discussions on profit-driven transition
• Elon Musk alleges OpenAI leaders breached trust and pursued enrichment
• Court yet to see full context as cross-examination continues

OpenAI President Greg Brockman’s journals — a series of text files from his computer — are changing the course of the trial in Elon Musk's civil lawsuit against Sam Altman. Musk has alleged OpenAI and its leaders have breached a charitable trust and unjustly enriched themselves by transitioning OpenAI from a non-profit to a for-profit structure. In their defense, OpenAI's executives have maintained from day one of the trial that the conversion to a for-profit structure was not primarily for personal benefit and enrichment. However, Brockman’s journals now show he was much clearer about greed and opportunism in converting OpenAI to a for-profit structure in 2017.

For example, in the journal, Brockman wrote: “It’d be wrong to take the non-profit from him and turn it into a B-corp without him—that’d be morally bankrupt, and he’s not an idiot.” Another entry said: “Maybe we should just switch to a for-profit—making money for ourselves sounds great.” And another admitted: “We can’t say we’re committed to the non-profit—if we become a B-corp in a few months, that would be a lie.”

In simple terms, the journal suggests that back in 2017, Brockman seemed mainly interested in money and his own benefit. At the same time, people at OpenAI appeared somewhat inconsistent—they were publicly talking about staying a non-profit, but privately considering becoming a for-profit to make money. They also knew that saying one thing and then quickly doing the opposite would be dishonest.

In his journal, Brockman even admitted, “It would be wrong to take the non-profit from him,” which sounds very similar to Elon Musk’s line about “stealing a charity.”

Courtroom exchanges and ongoing cross-examination

During cross-examination, when Musk’s lawyer, Steven Molo, read evidence aloud from the journal, Brockman often responded with phrases like “I wouldn’t put it that way” and “I’d need to see the full context.” He would even nitpick small skipped words like “a” or “the.”

Lawyers have not finished questioning yet, so more details that could explain or defend these events may still come out. Courts also prefer to see the full context, not just selected emails, and how they interpret Brockman’s journal can vary. Meanwhile, Elon Musk and his team keep stressing “AGI safety,” but that argument could weaken when real money and incentives are involved.

Elon Musk tried settlement

Just before court proceedings began, lawyers for OpenAI said in a filing that Elon Musk contacted Brockman two days before the trial to see if he was open to a settlement. Brockman suggested both sides drop their claims, but Musk wasn’t satisfied. According to the filing, he warned, “By the end of this week, you and Sam will be the most hated men in America.”

OpenAI’s lawyers tried to use these messages as evidence, arguing they showed Musk’s motive and bias—specifically that he was targeting a competitor and its leaders. However, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected the request, saying the messages should have been presented earlier during Musk’s testimony.

- Ends