Delhi | 25°C (windy)

Tech Titans Clash: Musk's Secret Bid for OpenAI Control Revealed, X's Lawsuit Uncovers Zuckerberg Approach

  • Nishadil
  • August 23, 2025
  • 0 Comments
  • 1 minutes read
  • 8 Views
Tech Titans Clash: Musk's Secret Bid for OpenAI Control Revealed, X's Lawsuit Uncovers Zuckerberg Approach

A bombshell court filing from X (formerly Twitter) has ripped open the curtains on the tumultuous early days of OpenAI, revealing an audacious attempt by Elon Musk to seize control of the burgeoning AI powerhouse – and a surprising outreach to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg for assistance.

The legal documents, part of X's ongoing lawsuit against OpenAI and its co-founders, paint a dramatic picture of internal strife and a fundamental clash over the future direction of artificial intelligence.

At the heart of the dispute is X's assertion that OpenAI, originally conceived as a non-profit, open-source venture dedicated to benefiting humanity, has veered sharply off course, transforming into a for-profit entity allegedly controlled by Microsoft and focused on commercial gain.

Perhaps the most startling revelation within the filing is Musk's alleged overture to Zuckerberg.

The documents claim that in an attempt to steer OpenAI towards a for-profit structure under his own control, Musk proposed a scenario where Meta could effectively take over OpenAI without needing to contribute additional capital. This audacious plan, put forward as OpenAI struggled with funding, underscores Musk's intense desire to influence its trajectory and his willingness to explore unconventional alliances.

Musk was an early backer and a co-founder of OpenAI, envisioned as a counterweight to the then-dominant AI efforts of Google.

The .

Disclaimer: This article was generated in part using artificial intelligence and may contain errors or omissions. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. We makes no representations or warranties regarding its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. Readers are advised to verify the information independently before relying on