In a Trial Pitting Him Against Elon Musk, Nobody Has More to Lose Than OpenAI CEO Sam Altman

CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman walks at the courthouse during a recess of the trial in Elon Musk's lawsuit over OpenAI for-profit conversion at a federal courthouse in Oakland, California, US, May 4, 2026. (Reuters)
CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman walks at the courthouse during a recess of the trial in Elon Musk's lawsuit over OpenAI for-profit conversion at a federal courthouse in Oakland, California, US, May 4, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

In a Trial Pitting Him Against Elon Musk, Nobody Has More to Lose Than OpenAI CEO Sam Altman

CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman walks at the courthouse during a recess of the trial in Elon Musk's lawsuit over OpenAI for-profit conversion at a federal courthouse in Oakland, California, US, May 4, 2026. (Reuters)
CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman walks at the courthouse during a recess of the trial in Elon Musk's lawsuit over OpenAI for-profit conversion at a federal courthouse in Oakland, California, US, May 4, 2026. (Reuters)

In a trial featuring a clash between Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, neither of the tech titans has emerged as an overly sympathetic character. But nobody has more to lose than Altman, who is expected to take the stand this week to defend himself.

Already, testimony about Altman's turbulent tenure at the ChatGPT maker has become prime fodder for internet jokes. One piece of evidence that has inspired countless memes was a text exchange between Altman and a company officer, Mira Murati, in 2023 during his short-lived ouster as CEO, when Altman asked if things were moving “directionally good or bad” and she wrote back: "Sam this is very bad.”

Musk, the world's richest man, is seeking Altman's second ouster from the company leadership as part of a civil lawsuit accusing him of betraying their shared vision for OpenAI. Since its start as a nonprofit funded primarily by Musk, Open AI has evolved into a capitalistic venture now valued at $852 billion.

Even if Musk loses, the trial has invited further scrutiny of Altman’s leadership at a pivotal time for the company and its competition with Musk’s own AI firm and another rival, Anthropic, formed by a group of seven ex-OpenAI leaders. All three firms are moving toward planned initial public offerings that are expected to be some of the largest ever.

A jury that’s already heard about Altman’s character from a parade of his former allies and adversaries will ultimately decide the verdict. But the repercussions could reverberate widely.

“This is not looking good for any of them and I think that that’s a little bit unfortunate for the AI industry at a time when the public perception of AI is quite negative and seems to be getting worse,” said Sarah Kreps, director of Cornell University’s Tech Policy Institute.

Musk warned Altman would be one of America's ‘most hated’ men

The lawsuit accuses Altman and his top lieutenant, Greg Brockman, of double-crossing Musk by straying from the San Francisco company’s founding mission to be an altruistic steward of a revolutionary technology. The lawsuit alleges they shifted into a moneymaking mode behind his back.

Shortly before the trial began, Musk abandoned a bid for damages for himself and instead is seeking an unspecified amount of money to be paid to fund the altruistic efforts of OpenAI’s charitable arm. In a text exchange with Brockman proposing a possible settlement, Musk warned that Brockman and Altman “will be the most hated men in America” as a result of the trial.

While Musk, the head of SpaceX, Tesla and a slew of other companies, was well known by the San Francisco Bay Area jury pool, fewer knew who Altman was before the start of the trial, even if they were familiar with ChatGPT.

As the trial has played out in a federal courtroom in Oakland, California over the last two weeks, jurors have heard from witnesses including OpenAI ex-board members Helen Toner and Tasha McCauley, who spoke about the decision to fire Altman in 2023 before they were themselves ousted from the board of directors when Altman returned to his role.

In video testimony last week, Toner said a starting point for the decision to oust Altman was when OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever, a respected AI scientist, reached out to confide some of his own concerns.

“A phrase we used was ‘a pattern of behavior,’ so no one single cause,” Toner said. “The pattern of behavior related to his honesty and candor, his resistance of board oversight.”

Sutskever was instrumental in the unsuccessful attempt to oust Altman but later said he regretted his role in the shakeup. In his own testimony Monday, Sutskever confirmed that he wrote a 2023 memo to OpenAI’s board that characterized Altman as pitting his executives against one another and exhibiting a “consistent pattern of lying” that was causing a loss of trust and productivity.

Sutskever said Altman’s behavior contributed to an environment that was “not conducive” to the company's goals, including its mission to safely build artificial general intelligence. He said he later backtracked and supported Altman’s reinstatement because he was concerned about what would happen to a company he worked hard to create and “cared very much about.”

“I felt that, had I not done this, the company would have been destroyed, and I felt that this was a Hail Mary,” he testified.

OpenAI begins presenting its side

The trial has carried risks also for Musk, who is pursuing an initial public offering this summer for his rocket ship maker, SpaceX, which could make him the world's first trillionaire. Among the witnesses has been Shivon Zilis, a former OpenAI board member who served as a conduit between Musk and OpenAI's leaders and also didn't disclose that Musk was the father of her two young twins, according to trial testimony.

Not until midday Monday, on the third week of the trial, did OpenAI begin calling its own witnesses, starting with Bret Taylor, the current chair of OpenAI’s board who painted a more positive portrait of Altman’s leadership.

“I think Sam has done a great job as CEO,” Taylor said. “He’s been forthright with me and the other board members.”

Syracuse University professor Shubha Ghosh, an expert in business and technology law, said regardless of the outcome of the case, he has doubts about Altman staying on as CEO of OpenAI in the long run.

“A lot this of might depend upon a testimony,” he said. “And I don’t know what he’s going to say or how he’s gonna say it. But even like the best case, movie theater type performance, with all the music playing and whatnot, I don’t see him coming off as a fairly strong leader, especially (since) this case has gone this far."



TikTok Reaches $400 Million Settlement with US Justice Department over Children's Privacy

FILED - 24 August 2022, North Rhine-Westphalia, Cologne: The logo of Tik Tok is seen at Gamescom. Photo: Rolf Vennenbernd/dpa
FILED - 24 August 2022, North Rhine-Westphalia, Cologne: The logo of Tik Tok is seen at Gamescom. Photo: Rolf Vennenbernd/dpa
TT

TikTok Reaches $400 Million Settlement with US Justice Department over Children's Privacy

FILED - 24 August 2022, North Rhine-Westphalia, Cologne: The logo of Tik Tok is seen at Gamescom. Photo: Rolf Vennenbernd/dpa
FILED - 24 August 2022, North Rhine-Westphalia, Cologne: The logo of Tik Tok is seen at Gamescom. Photo: Rolf Vennenbernd/dpa

TikTok has reached a $400 million settlement with the US Department of Justice, ending a 2024 lawsuit alleging the company violated federal children's privacy laws.

The DOJ said Friday that TikTok will pay $300 million immediately and another $100 million after an order vacates an earlier consent decree against its predecessor company, Musical.ly.

“This settlement is a major victory for American children and parents,” said US Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr. in a statement. “The Department’s priority is ensuring that children are protected online and that companies entrusted with their personal information meet their legal obligations. This resolution secures a substantial recovery while reinforcing the protections that families expect and deserve.”

Since the DOJ's lawsuit in 2024, TikTok has undergone major changes, most notably in the ownership structure of its US arm. In January, the social video platform company signed agreements with major investors including Oracle, Silver Lake and MGX to form the new TikTok US joint venture.

Representatives for TikTok did not immediately respond to a message for comment Friday.

The latest lawsuit focused on allegations that TikTok and its China-based parent company ByteDance violated a federal law that requires kid-oriented apps and websites to get parental consent before collecting personal information of children under 13. It also says the companies failed to honor requests from parents who wanted their children’s accounts deleted, and chose not to delete accounts even when the firms knew they belonged to kids under 13.

The settlement comes as social media companies face an avalanche of lawsuits over children's safety and privacy and a growing number of countries are banning young kids and teens from social media apps. Instagram's parent company, Meta Platforms, is currently on trial in federal court in Oakland, California, over allegations it violated the 1998 Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA, along with various state statutes.


How AI Is Changing Event Discovery, Booking

Nadeem Bakhsh, chief executive and co-founder of webook.com (Company handout)
Nadeem Bakhsh, chief executive and co-founder of webook.com (Company handout)
TT

How AI Is Changing Event Discovery, Booking

Nadeem Bakhsh, chief executive and co-founder of webook.com (Company handout)
Nadeem Bakhsh, chief executive and co-founder of webook.com (Company handout)

A night out can start with a simple question: “What should we do tonight?”

That is where traditional search can struggle. It works best when users already know the event, date, or location they want. Booking platforms are now using artificial intelligence to tackle the opposite problem: first understanding vague intent, then turning it into options that can actually be booked.

Nadeem Bakhsh, chief executive and co-founder of webook.com, says the platform’s AI booking agent was not built because existing search tools were failing. It was designed to add another layer of discovery for users who do not yet know exactly what they want.

Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Bakhsh said search and filters remain effective when users have a clear target. Open-ended questions, however, require the system to understand context before it can surface the right option.

From keywords to intent

In its first version, the agent uses natural language processing in Arabic and English and can handle informal requests that include location, preferences, group type or booking criteria.

Users do not need to know an event’s name or phrase their request like a search query, Bakhsh said. They can simply ask for a family activity, a nearby experience or something available in the evening.

The system then interprets the request, identifies the relevant details and matches them with options in the platform’s live catalog.

If key information is missing, the agent is designed to ask for clarification rather than produce a generic list that may not fit the user’s needs.

That makes accuracy central to the experience. The more discovery shifts from explicit search to conversation, the greater the risk that a question will be misunderstood or misinterpreted.

When the agent gets it wrong

Bakhsh acknowledges that mistakes are part of using AI systems.

The agent, he said, “should not pretend to know.” If a request is unclear or incomplete, it should ask for more information rather than force an unreliable recommendation.

The official booking page remains the final authority on availability, prices, fees and event terms. If information changes or tickets sell out before a purchase is completed, the details shown in the official booking flow take precedence over anything said earlier in the conversation.

When the agent cannot verify information, Bakhsh said, it should direct the user to official event details or human support.

A correction from the user may also help improve the next response, but Bakhsh does not present that as a guarantee that the same mistake will not happen again.

Recommendation or advertising?

Trust becomes a commercial issue when the agent is not only finding events, but ranking and recommending them.

Bakhsh said the system is meant to match user intent with options that are genuinely available to book, not present paid advertising as personal advice.

Recommendations are based on criteria supplied by the user, including location, timing, group type and activity preference, as well as live availability.

Any paid or sponsored placement, he said, should be clearly labeled so users can distinguish an organic recommendation from commercial content.

“Trust depends on making that distinction clear,” Bakhsh said.

One journey, several channels

The experience becomes more complicated when the conversation starts outside the booking platform itself, on services such as X, Instagram or WhatsApp.

Bakhsh said the agent uses information users choose to provide, such as location, timing, group type, interests and booking criteria, to make suggestions more relevant.

Public interactions remain limited to discovery. Once greater privacy is required, the conversation moves to a private channel and then into webook.com’s secure booking environment.

Card details and other sensitive personal information should not be requested through public posts, comments or direct messages on social media, he said.

Personal data remains subject to the platform’s privacy policy and to legal and regulatory retention requirements.

Bakhsh also said data is not treated as freely transferable from one channel to another. Any personalization depends on the permissions granted by the user and the purpose for which the data was collected.

What webook.com builds — and what it does not

The agent is not built entirely with in-house technology.

Bakhsh said webook.com develops and operates the core product layer and orchestration system. That includes understanding booking intent, linking it to the catalog, applying product logic, generating recommendations and directing users into the secure booking flow.

External infrastructure is used when needed for language-model processing, cloud services and access to channels such as X, Instagram and WhatsApp.

Those providers supply infrastructure or distribution channels, Bakhsh said, but they do not own the event inventory, booking logic or customer journey.

The company does not disclose vendor architecture or security-sensitive implementation details.

Bakhsh also stressed that the agent remains in beta and can make mistakes. Users should verify event details and final booking information on the official page before completing a transaction.

Discovery ends where the transaction begins

One of the main safeguards in the system is the separation between conversation and payment.

The agent may respond to a general request in a public space, but when privacy becomes necessary, it moves the interaction into a private channel and then directs the user to an official, identity-linked booking flow.

It does not request card details or sensitive information through social media posts, comments, or direct messages.

Bakhsh said this structure helps limit the impact of prompt manipulation, impersonation, fraudulent accounts, and fake booking links.

The conversational layer can help users find an event, but it cannot bypass the inventory, account, pricing, or payment controls on the official platform.

The agent does not set the price

Once a user moves from discovery to purchase, the agent’s role stops at a clear boundary.

Options come from the live catalog, but the official booking page remains the authoritative transaction interface.

Before confirming, users see current availability, the final price, booking fees and event-specific terms, including cancellation and refund policies.

The agent cannot change those terms or guarantee that a ticket will still be available while a user waits.

Age restrictions and accessibility requirements are shown only when they appear in the official event details. If the information is unclear, the system is not supposed to guess.

AI, in other words, changes how users reach an option. It does not change the contractual terms or controls governing the purchase.

Bakhsh also links the agent to a broader framework called TruFan, while drawing a distinction between the two.

The AI agent operates at the start of the journey, turning natural-language requests into bookable options.

TruFan addresses a different stage: integrity and access to high-demand events, by helping identify genuine, verified fans and giving them priority.


Apple Paid 40% of its Global Taxes to Ireland in Last Fiscal Year

FILE PHOTO: An Apple logo and a computer motherboard appear in this illustration taken August 25, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: An Apple logo and a computer motherboard appear in this illustration taken August 25, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
TT

Apple Paid 40% of its Global Taxes to Ireland in Last Fiscal Year

FILE PHOTO: An Apple logo and a computer motherboard appear in this illustration taken August 25, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: An Apple logo and a computer motherboard appear in this illustration taken August 25, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

Apple paid Ireland $17.1billion in taxes last year, representing around 40% of its worldwide total, according to a company filing that detailed the iPhone maker's global tax liabilities country-by-country.

Apple said the amount paid to Ireland was "significantly higher" than income taxes accrued as it included €13 billion ($15.18 billion) in back taxes that it was ordered to pay Ireland by European Union's top court in 2024, Reuters reported.

Ireland fought the EU back-tax bill alongside Apple for eight years, seeking to defend its position as the location of choice for US multinationals in Europe - and the billions of euros in direct and indirect taxes they bring in each year.

In 2016, the European Commission's competition chief at the time, Margrethe Vestager, accused Ireland of having granted Apple illegal tax benefits, unfairly diverting investment away from other countries.

Apple paid $43.2 billion in income taxes worldwide in the fiscal year that ended in September 2025.