Greg Brockman's Diary Fuels Elon Musk's $134 Billion OpenAI Lawsuit

The trial entered its second week with the spotlight on Brockman’s handwritten notes from the company’s 2015 founding period. Prosecutors presented the diary as proof that Brockman and CEO Sam Altman deliberately shifted OpenAI from a non‑profit to a for‑profit model, enriching themselves at Musk’s expense.

Musk seeks $134 billion in damages, to be paid to OpenAI’s non‑profit arm, and demands the removal of Altman and Brockman. He alleges the duo violated the original agreement by converting the organization into a for‑profit entity and by siphoning funds that should have remained charitable.

Key diary entries have been quoted repeatedly in court. In one passage Brockman wrote, “Financially what will take me to $1 B?” – a question he later clarified as a curiosity about revenue plans beyond donations. Another entry described Musk as “really not an idiot,” prompting Musk’s lawyer Steven Molo to ask whether Brockman meant only an idiot would allow Musk to “steal a charity.” Brockman denied any implication of deceit.

During deposition, Brockman explained that the journal was a stream‑of‑consciousness record, never intended for public view. He emphasized that the entries were not evidence of dishonesty, stating, “It’s very painful… there’s nothing in there that I’m ashamed of.” OpenAI’s legal team argues the excerpts are taken out of context and that Musk was aware of the for‑profit intent from the start.

The diary’s relevance extends beyond this case. A March federal ruling forced OpenAI to release portions of Brockman’s journal to the New York Times and other plaintiffs in a separate copyright lawsuit alleging the company used newspaper content without permission to train its models.

Both parties have used the diary to shape narratives. Musk’s camp portrays the notes as a window into Brockman’s personal ambition, while OpenAI points to Brockman’s later comment that stealing the non‑profit “would be morally bankrupt.” The judge, Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, has cited the diary in denying OpenAI’s motion to keep the trial from proceeding.

What to watch next: the court’s ruling on whether the diary constitutes admissible evidence and how it will affect the $134 billion claim.