On the seventh day of the federal trial, Shivon Zilis, who once held a board seat at OpenAI and shares a personal connection with Elon Musk, provided testimony about the nonprofit’s internal decisions and strategic shifts. Her account centered on a crucial period when OpenAI’s founders debated possible corporate structures to secure funding, culminating in a controversial contract with Microsoft.
Zilis described her involvement both as an OpenAI board member from 2020 to 2023 and as a senior advisor to Musk. During her testimony, she addressed the $10 billion Microsoft investment contract that granted the tech giant enhanced access to OpenAI’s intellectual property. Musk’s lawsuit hinges on this deal, claiming that Altman and Brockman violated their fiduciary duty to preserve OpenAI’s charitable mission by prioritizing commercial interests.
She recounted her lifelong fascination with artificial intelligence, sparked by repeatedly reading futurist Ray Kurzweil’s “The Age of Spiritual Machines” as a teenager. This early passion guided her career across AI incubators and venture capital firms before she joined OpenAI. Initially offered the role of chief operating officer by Greg Brockman, one of OpenAI’s founding members and current president, she declined the position since the organization had yet to develop market-ready products. Instead, she committed a part-time effort aligned with OpenAI’s mission.
The trial also exposed the complexity of Zilis’s relationship with Musk. Beyond professional ties, the two share four children, including twins born in 2021, underscoring the personal dynamics intertwined with the litigation. Zilis’s testimony was measured and straightforward, reflecting her deep industry experience and nuanced position between both parties.
Musk’s legal action asserts that Altman and Brockman diverted OpenAI’s nonprofit assets toward profit-driven interests, undermining the organization's original goal of advancing AI for humanity’s benefit. Zilis’s insights into board decisions and internal negotiations offer critical context for the jury assessing these claims.