OpenAI’s president does ‘all the things,’ except answer a question

The focus on Brockman specifically shifts attention away from Musk's own credibility problems in court and toward OpenAI's internal record-keeping, particularly how journal entries function as evidence of intent rather than just narrative color. That's a meaningful evidentiary distinction the summary gestures at but doesn't fully unpack.

This is week two of a trial Modelwire has tracked closely since opening arguments. The Verge's own week-one recap ('Elon Musk had a bad week in court,' May 1) framed the early proceedings as trending against Musk, but Brockman's cross-examination complicates that read by giving Musk's legal team a cleaner target: not Musk's credibility, but OpenAI's internal consistency. The MIT Technology Review week-one summary also flagged that Brockman was central to Musk's fraud claims, so his evasiveness on the stand is not incidental, it's the core evidentiary battleground the trial was always building toward. The governance-versus-mission tension that has run through every piece in this series now has a human face attached to it.

Watch whether OpenAI's legal team calls Altman to testify directly in the coming days. If Altman takes the stand and faces similar cross-examination on the nonprofit-to-capped-profit transition, it will signal the judge is allowing broad discovery into founding intent rather than narrowing the case on procedural grounds.