OpenAI Trial Day 3: Judge Says 'Future Of Humanity Not In Musk’s Hands'

The legal battle between Tech billionaire Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is heating up, and day three of the trial saw sharp exchanges inside the courtroom. During the hearing, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers made it clear she was not interested in long debates about AI destroying humanity. Even before Musk returned to the witness stand, the judge told his legal team to avoid that line of argument. When Musk’s lawyer Steven Molo tried to push the point, the judge stepped in firmly."I suspect that there are a number of people who do not want to put the future of humanity in Mr. Musk’s hands. But we’re not going to get into that. We just are not going to have this whole thing explode for the world to view it," the judge said.This could go against

Musk, as he believes AI is a threat and wants to control its risks.Musk vs OpenAI Trial Heats Up As Elon Musk Calls Questions ‘Designed To Trick’ Him

Later, OpenAI’s lead lawyer William Savitt went on the offensive during cross-examination. He played clips from Musk’s earlier deposition to point out inconsistencies. In one instance, Musk had earlier said he had not read a key OpenAI document. But in court, he admitted he had read at least part of it. This back-and-forth clearly irritated Musk as questioning continued.Savitt also questioned Musk about X (formerly Twitter), asking if he had ever influenced its algorithm to boost his own posts. Musk denied doing so.Another big moment came when Musk suggested that AI companies, including his own xAI, may use techniques like distillation involving OpenAI models.“Generally all the AI companies do that,” he said.Elon Musk Admits OpenAI Models Were Used To Train xAI In Court Testimony

For those unfamiliar, model distillation is essentially a shortcut. A large, powerful AI system acts like a teacher, passing knowledge to a smaller, more efficient model. It’s widely used inside companies to optimise performance and reduce costs. But things get complicated when one company’s model is used to train another’s. That’s where the line between innovation and intellectual property concerns starts to blur.