Elon Musk tried to settle his lawsuit against OpenAI two days before trial started, then warned OpenAI president Greg Brockman that he and Sam Altman would be 'the most hated men in America' by the end of the week. OpenAI disclosed the exchange in a Sunday court filing dated May 4, 2026, and is asking Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to admit the message as evidence of Musk's motive. If she does, Brockman will likely testify about it directly when he takes the stand this week.
The lawsuit alleges Altman steered OpenAI away from its founding nonprofit mission. According to the filing, Musk reached out to Brockman to 'gauge interest' in a settlement. Brockman replied with the obvious symmetric offer — both sides drop their claims. Musk refused, then sent the line about being the most hated men in America: 'If you insist, so it will be.'
OpenAI's argument is that the message is not a real settlement overture and shouldn't get the usual privilege protection. The company called it 'coercive rather than conciliatory' and said it 'tends to prove motive and bias,' specifically that 'Musk's motivation in pursuing this lawsuit is to attack a competitor and its principals.' That framing matters because settlement communications are normally inadmissible.
Key facts
- 01Musk messaged Greg Brockman two days before trial to gauge a settlement, then warned Altman and Brockman would be 'the most hated men in America.'
- 02OpenAI filed the exchange on Sunday, May 4, 2026, asking Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to admit the message as evidence of Musk's motive.
- 03OpenAI's lawyer William Savitt was on Musk's legal team during the 2022 Twitter case where Musk's side threatened 'World War III until the end of time.'
- 04Brockman is expected to take the stand this week and could testify directly about Musk's message if the court admits it.
- 05Musk was the first witness when trial opened last week and conceded ground on AI existential risk and his knowledge of xAI safety practices.
OpenAI's filing leans on a precedent from Musk's own past — the 2022 case in which he tried to back out of buying Twitter. During that dispute, Musk's legal team invited a 'renegotiation' of the purchase price while warning it would be 'World War III until the end of time for real' for Twitter leaders 'and their heirs.' Musk also reportedly told Twitter executives that if he ended up owning the company, he could read everyone's emails and 'dig into whatever he wanted to dig into.'
“OpenAI argues the message is 'coercive rather than conciliatory' and 'tends to prove motive and bias' — that Musk is using the suit to attack a competitor.”— Jaeden Schafer
Those Twitter-era threats were ultimately admitted because Musk's lawyers signaled intent to disclose them to opposing counsel. OpenAI is arguing the same logic should apply now: a message designed to intimidate isn't a privileged settlement discussion, regardless of how it's labeled.
There is an awkward symmetry working against Musk. William Savitt, the OpenAI lawyer who cross-examined Musk last week, was on Musk's own legal team during the Twitter case. He would have firsthand memory of the 'World War III' threat at the exact moment Musk's message to Brockman landed.
Musk's first day on the stand did not go well. He conceded points under cross, walked back claims that AI risk may quickly become existential, and admitted he was not deeply familiar with AI safety practices at his own company, xAI. The contrast with his public posture on AI doom — a recurring theme in his attacks on Altman — was hard to miss.
OpenAI also tied the Brockman message to what it described as a pattern of 'similar menacing statements' Musk has made throughout the litigation. The company is framing the entire case as a harassment campaign aimed at ejecting Altman over a personal grudge, rather than a good-faith dispute over OpenAI's nonprofit conversion. The Sunday filing follows OpenAI's earlier disclosure that Musk had sought a settlement at all.
Musk's lawyers will argue the opposite: that admitting a private settlement-adjacent communication would chill any future negotiation between adversaries and that the court should stick to the standard rule. It is a clean legal argument, but it runs into the inconvenient fact that Musk has been on both sides of this exception now.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers will likely have to rule before Brockman takes the stand, expected today or tomorrow. If she admits the message, the jury hears Musk threaten Altman and Brockman in the witness's own words. If she excludes it, Musk avoids a second viral courtroom moment in the same week.
The deeper problem for Musk is that the trial keeps surfacing material that undercuts the public version of his fight with OpenAI. He has cast the suit as a defense of OpenAI's original mission and a warning about AI safety. The evidence OpenAI is putting in front of the court — the settlement overture, the threat, the xAI admissions — paints it as a competitive grudge match between the founder of xAI and the CEO of the company he left. Whichever way Gonzalez Rogers rules on the email, that frame is now the one the jury is being asked to weigh.
Working on something we should cover, or seeing a story we missed? Send leads, documents, or feedback to hello@aichatdaily.com. For sensitive tips, see our secure tips page for Signal and PGP options.
Spotted an error? Email hello@aichatdaily.com with the URL and the issue, or read our full corrections policy.
