메뉴
BL
TechCrunch AI 31일 전

법정에 선 머스크, 자신의 트윗을 피하지 못하다

IMP
8/10
핵심 요약

일론 머스크는 오픈AI의 비영리 구조를 둔 소송과 관련해 증언하는 과정에서, 자신의 트윗과 정면으로 배치되는 발언을 하며 논란의 대상이 되었습니다. 특히 테슬라가 범용인공지능(AGI)을 개발 중이라는 자신의 게시물과 달리 현재는 자율주행에만 집중하고 있다고 인정하며 주주들의 이목을 끌었습니다. 이번 재판은 오픈AI 내 수익 배분 한도(비영리) 체계와 관련된 머스크의 주장이 배심원과 판사를 얼마나 설득할 수 있을지에 초점이 맞춰져 있습니다.

번역된 본문

일론 머스크는 수요일 캘리포니아 연방법원에 출석해 샘 알트만(Sam Altman)과 그의 공동 창립자들이 '자선단체를 훔쳤다'고 주장했습니다. 하지만 그는 증언대에서 테슬라가 현재 범용인공지능(AGI)을 개발하고 있지 않다는 사실을 선서 아래 인정했으며, 이는 불과 몇 주 전에 자신이 올린 게시물과 직접적으로 모순되는 발언이었습니다. 머스크에게는 참으로 난감한 하루였습니다.

그가 제기한 오픈AI 구조 변경에 대한 소송은 샘 알트만과 다른 공동 창립자들이 비영리 단체에 투자하도록 자신을 속인 뒤, 이윤을 추구하는 영리 법인을 출범시켜 조직을 장악했다고 주장합니다. 가끔씩 신경전이 오가는 가운데 머스크가 몇 시간 동안 증언한 후, 이 사건의 승패는 배심원과 이본 곤잘레스 로저스(Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers) 판사가 오픈AI 투자자들의 수익 상한선 설정 여부에 대해 얼마나 명확한 구분을 짓는지에 달려 있는 것으로 보입니다.

머스크의 설명에 따르면, 그가 샘 알트만, 일리야 수츠케버(Ilya Sutskever), 그레그 브록만(Greg Brockman) 등과 함께 연구소를 공동 설립했을 때 인류를 위한 AI를 구축해 줄 것이라고 믿었지만, 시간이 지나면서 그들의 동기를 의심하기 시작했고 결국 그들이 '비영리 단체를 약탈하고 있다'는 결론을 내렸습니다. 오픈AI 측 변호사인 윌리엄 새빗(William Savitt)은 교차 심문 과정에서 이러한 머스크의 주장을 반박하며, 머스크가 구글 등과 경쟁하기 위해 필요한 자금을 조달할 수 있도록 오픈AI를 영리 법인으로 전환하거나 아예 테슬라에 편입시키려는 다양한 시도를 지지했다는 점을 보여주려 했습니다.

머스크는 2016년 초부터 회사를 영리 법인으로 전환하는 것에 대해 논의했으며, 2017년에는 자신이 지분의 대부분을 보유하고 회사를 통제하는 오픈AI의 영리 법인을 설립하는 방안을 모색했다고 증언했습니다. 이러한 계획이 무산된 후, 그는 오픈AI에 대한 정기적인 기부를 중단했지만 2020년까지 사무실 비용은 계속 지불했습니다.

(TechCrunch 행사 관련 광고 문구 생략)

머스크는 투자자의 수익이 제한되는 경우와 무제한인 경우 사이에 큰 차이가 있다고 강력하게 주장했습니다. 초기 마이크로소프트의 오픈AI 투자는 이 소프트웨어 거대 기업의 수익을 제한했지만, 그러한 제한은 수년에 걸쳐 점차 해제되었습니다. 머스크는 이러한 변화가 결국 자신이 이 소송을 제기하게 된 원인이라고 말했습니다.

새빗 변호사는 알트만과 머스크의 오랜 조언자이자 그의 아이 4명의 어머기도 한 시본 질리스(Shivon Zillis)가 후속 자금 조달 노력에 대해 머스크와 상의했으나 머스크가 이의를 제기하지 않았다는 점을 확실히 하려 했습니다. 질리스는 또한 이러한 거래 중 일부를 승인했을 때 오픈AI 이사회의 일원이기도 했습니다.

이러한 교차 심문은 테슬라의 AI 야망으로까지 확장되었습니다. 특히 머스크는 테슬라가 경쟁하는 AI 기술을 개발하기 위한 노력에 대해 질문을 받았고, 자신이 X(옛 트위터)에 올린 게시물과 모순되는 함정에 빠지게 되었습니다. 머스크가 테슬라의 AI 작업이 자율주행에만 집중하고 있으며 AGI(인간이 수행할 수 있는 모든 지적 작업을 수행할 수 있는 AI 시스템을 지칭하는 용어)가 아니라고 밝힌 직후, 그는 '테슬라가 AGI를 만들 회사 중 하나가 될 것'이라고 주장했던 최근 게시물에 대해 추궁을 받았습니다.

머스크는 법원에 "우리는 지금 AGI를 개발하고 있지 않다"고 진술했습니다. (테슬라 주주들은 이 점을 주목할 필요가 있습니다.) 머스크는 또한 실제 거래된 금액인 3,800만 달러가 아닌 오픈AI에 1억 달러를 투자했다고 주장했던 게시물에 대해서도 질문을 받았습니다. 그는 자신의 명성과 네트워크가 그 금액의 차이를 메꾸고도 남는다고 반박했습니다. (새빗 변호사의 추가 질문으로 내용이 이어집니다.)

원문 보기
원문 보기 (영어)
Elon Musk came to a California federal court on Wednesday to argue that Sam Altman and his cofounders "stole a charity." He left having admitted, under oath, that Tesla is not currently pursuing artificial general intelligence (AGI)— directly contradicting a tweet he'd posted just weeks earlier. It was that kind of day for Musk. The lawsuit he filed challenging the structure of OpenAI alleges Sam Altman and the other cofounders tricked him into backing a non-profit, then launched the frontier lab’s for-profit arm and let it come to dominate the organization. After an occasionally testy Musk testified for hours, it appears the case may come down to how much of a distinction jurors and Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers make between investors in OpenAI having their potential profit capped or not. In Musk’s telling, when he cofounded the lab with Sam Altman, Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman and others, he trusted them to build AI for humanity, but over time became suspicious of their motives, and finally concluded that they were “looting the nonprofit.” OpenAI’s lawyer William Savitt sought to complicate that story during cross-examination, trying to show that Musk had supported a variety of efforts to transition OpenAI toward for-profit status so it could raise the funds necessary to compete with firms like Google, including incorporating the AI lab into Tesla. Musk testified that he had discussed converting the company to a for-profit as early as 2016, and that in 2017, he had explored creating a for-profit arm of OpenAI where he would hold the majority of the equity and control the company. When those plans fell apart, he stopped making regular donations to OpenAI, though he continued to pay for its office space until 2020. Techcrunch event Meet your next investor or portfolio startup at Disrupt Your next round. Your next hire. Your next breakout opportunity. Find it at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026, where 10,000+ founders, investors, and tech leaders gather for three days of 250+ tactical sessions, powerful introductions, and market-defining innovation. Register now to save up to $410. Meet your next investor or portfolio startup at Disrupt Your next round. Your next hire. Your next breakout opportunity. Find it at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026, where 10,000+ founders, investors, and tech leaders gather for three days of 250+ tactical sessions, powerful introductions, and market-defining innovation. Register now to save up to $410. San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026 REGISTER NOW Musk insisted that there was a big difference between investors whose profits are capped and those whose profits are unlimited. The earliest major investments by Microsoft in OpenAI limited the software giant’s profits, but those restrictions have been rolled back over the years. Musk says those changes ultimately led him to bring this lawsuit. Savitt tried to establish that Musk had been consulted by Altman and Shivon Zillis — his longtime adviser who is also the mother of four of his children — about subsequent efforts to raise money, and did not object. Zillis was also a member of the OpenAI board when it approved some of those transactions. That cross-examination extended to Tesla's AI ambitions. Notably, Musk was asked about Tesla’s efforts to develop competing AI technologies and found himself, not for the first time, on the wrong side of one of his own posts on X. After Musk said that Tesla’s AI work was focused only on self-driving and not AGI (a term for AI systems that can perform any intellectual task that a human can), he was asked about a recent post claiming that “Tesla will be one of the companies to make AGI.” “We are not pursuing AGI right now,” Musk told the court. (Tesla shareholders may want to take note.) Musk was also asked about a post where he claimed to have invested $100 million in OpenAI, rather than the $38 million that actually changed hands. He argued that his reputation and network made up for the disparity. Savitt brought up emails where Musk had backed efforts by Tesla and his brain interface company, Neuralink, to poach employees from OpenAI while he was still on that company’s board. One conversation focused on Andrej Karpathy, who departed OpenAI to lead self-driving work at Tesla. Another focused on Sutskever, whom Zillis suggested Musk recruit to Tesla. The most consequential thread of the day, though, may have been about harm prevention. Part of Musk’s case rests on the idea that OpenAI transition into a traditional corporation is dangerous to society because it reduces the company’s focus on safety. Savitt, in turn, had Musk admit that all AI companies, including his own, suffer from this risk. Judge Gonzalez Rogers halted that line of questioning, but in remarks to the lawyers after testimony concluded made clear it would resume, with limits. When Musk’s lawyers floated questions about ChatGPT’s role in the Tumbler Ridge shooting—an incident earlier this year in Canada in which a person went on a killing spree after extensive conversations with the chatbot—she made clear that she didn’t want to hear about scandals caused by AI models, but that xAI and OpenAI's approaches to safety were fair game. Musk returns Thursday for another round of adversarial questioning. Also expected to testify are his family office manager, Jared Birchall; AI safety expert Stuart Russell; and OpenAI president Greg Brockman. Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated details of the Tumbler Ridge shooting due to an editing error. It has been updated. Topics AI When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission . This doesn’t affect our editorial independence. Tim Fernholz Senior Reporter Tim Fernholz is a journalist who writes about technology, finance and public policy. He has closely covered the rise of the private space industry and is the author of Rocket Billionaires: Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and the New Space Race. Formerly, he was a senior reporter at Quartz, the global business news site, for more than a decade, and began his career as a political reporter in Washington, D.C. You can contact or verify outreach from Tim by emailing tim.fernholz@techcrunch.com or via an encrypted message to tim_fernholz.21 on Signal. View Bio April 30 San Francisco, CA StrictlyVC kicks off the year in SF. Register now for unfiltered fireside chats and VC insights with leaders from Uber, Replit, Eclipse, and more. Plus, high-value connections that actually move the needle. Tickets are limited. REGISTER NOW Most Popular OpenAI ends Microsoft legal peril over its $50B Amazon deal Julie Bort DeepMind's David Silver just raised $1.1B to build an AI that learns without human data Anna Heim The Stanford freshmen who want to rule the world … will probably read this book and try even harder Connie Loizos Two college kids raise a $5.1 million pre-seed to build an AI social network in iMessage Dominic-Madori Davis Meta's loss is Thinking Machines' gain Connie Loizos Google to invest up to $40B in Anthropic in cash and compute Rebecca Bellan OpenAI releases GPT-5.5, bringing company one step closer to an AI ‘super app' Lucas Ropek