The economics of goodwill

Or lack of such.

“Elon Musk is a greedy, racist, homophobic piece of garbage,” said one prospective juror, as quoted by The Verge reporter Elizabeth Lopatto from the San Francisco courthouse Monday.

After the jury voir dire process was halfway through, Lopatto reported that out of the first 20 prospective jurors, five had such negative feelings about Elon that they said as much, though only one of them said they disliked him so much they couldn’t be fair were they to serve on the jury—surely one of the easiest jury outs of all time.

“Elon Musk’s lawyer tried to get some jurors thrown out for disliking Musk,” Lopatto reported as voir dire wound down. But—and this is the really good part—the judge wasn’t having it.

“The reality is that people don’t like him. Many people don’t like him,” said Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers, in what may be the closest an on the record courtroom exchange has come to re-enacting the Star Wars cantina scene.

Musk’s lawyers should have probably requested a change of venue - not that they would have been successful.

7 Likes

From what I read this jury does not decide the case but solely advises the judge who does the deciding. This change seems to be caused by Elon dismissing some of the charges against Sam Altman focusing the case on returning OpenAI to the non-profit status. Also, Elon would give any money he receives back to OpenAI.

Google AI:

Based on reporting from the trial, yes, the jury acts in an advisory, non-binding capacity, with Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers making the final decision on whether to legally restructure OpenAI.

Here is a breakdown of the current situation based on the 2026 proceedings:

  • Jury’s Role: The nine-person jury seated in Oakland federal court is evaluating two remaining claims—unjust enrichment and breach of charitable trust—to advise the judge on the remedy.

  • Focus on Non-Profit Status: The case aims to reverse OpenAI’s 2025 conversion to a for-profit public benefit corporation, seeking to return it to a pure non-profit structure.

  • Musk’s Pledges: Elon Musk has stated he will donate any potential lawsuit winnings (reportedly seeking $134 billion to $150 billion in damages) back to the OpenAI nonprofit foundation and not to himself.

  • Dismissed Charges: Ahead of the trial, Musk’s lawyers did indeed drop additional fraud charges to streamline the case toward the breach of charitable trust.

  • Altman’s Status: The lawsuit seeks the removal of Sam Altman and Greg Brockman from the board and executive roles.

The judge has split the trial into two phases: first to determine liability (whether Altman/OpenAI broke trust), and second to determine the remedy (how to fix it). The trial is expected to last four weeks.

I got it mostly right! :innocent:

The Captain

3 Likes

What a weird methodology. What should be an expert being advised by neophytes**.**

I have to wonder what legal value I would add I were asked to advise a judge.

It is a little strange. But basically, there are two types of civil cases (or civil claims). There are cases at law, and cases in equity. Cases at law involve the strict application of rules to the facts and almost always involve only monetary damages. Cases at equity, though, are when the party is asking the court for some non-monetary remedy (an injunction, rescission of a contract, or the like) where the decision is going to be fashioned based on questions of justice and fairness. Back in the day, there were actually different courts that sat on cases at law and cases in equity - now they’re all combined.

Anyway, in cases at law you (generally) have a right to have questions of fact decided by a jury (the judge always decides legal questions). But in equity you don’t have a right to a jury. The judge is the final arbiter of questions of both fact and law. However, the court can empanel a jury to advise the judge on questions of fact. The decision isn’t delegated to them, but they will tell the judge what they think of the facts. Judges will do that for the same reason that we have juries in most other cases - we generally think the deliberative institution of the jury will reach a more accurate decision on factual questions (like witness credibility and the like) than we do a single judge.

8 Likes

Don’t worry about it. Sam Altman does not know how to win friends either.

And not that it would have made a difference.

I’ve been to Boston, Charleston, Dayton
Louisiana, Washington, Houston
Kingston, Texarkana, Monterey, Ferriday
Santa Fe, Tallahoosa, Glen Rock
Black Rock, Little Rock, Oskaloosa
Tennessee, Hennessey, Chicopee Spirit Lake
Grand Lake, Devil’s Lake, Crater Lake, for Pete’s sake

Musk is hated everywhere, man.

True dat! I hope they both lose.

10 Likes