Presented himself as having consistently opposed converting OpenAI into a for-profit enterprise.
Evidence chain
From statement to verdict.
- 01
Original statement
Presented himself as having consistently opposed converting OpenAI into a for-profit enterprise.
Feb 29, 2024 · Factual Assertion
- 02
Measurable target
Present-tense or retrospective claim
Not applicable
- 03
Observed outcome
Emails from 2015 through 2018 show Musk questioned the nonprofit structure, supported a for-profit, created a proposed public-benefit corporation, and sought control of the new entity. His later objection was not a consistent opposition to any for-profit structure.
Evaluated Jul 26, 2026
- 04
Verdict and score
Misleading
50 of 100 points under the v5 rubric. Some facts are accurate, but omitted context or framing materially changes the reasonable takeaway.
Record details
How this row was evaluated.
- Subject category
- Business & Technology
- Organization or context
- OpenAI
- Relationship to organization
- Former affiliation
- Assertion mode
- Civil complaint framing
- Deadline result
- Not applicable
- Eventual outcome
- Not applicable
- Factual accuracy
- Misleading
- Canonical classification
- Misleading
- Score points
- 50 / 100
- Included in headline score
- Yes
- Research confidence
- Medium
- Credible-source contestation
- Yes
- Contestation resolution
- Authenticated emails materially contradicted a consistent anti-for-profit narrative.
- Correction status
- No public correction identified
- Deleted after challenge
- No
- Repeated after correction
- No
- Evidence-documented repetition count
- 1
Intent stays separate
Was intentional deception established?
No
- Detailed assessment
- Suggested but not established
- Intent evidence level
- 1 / 3
Authenticated emails show Musk advocated a for-profit structure, created a proposed public-benefit corporation, and sought control. That conflicts with a later presentation of consistent opposition, but intent is not conclusively established.
“No” does not mean the statement was true. It means the cited evidence did not meet the higher standard needed to establish the speaker's state of mind.
Evidence strength
A disclosed measure of evidence quality—not a probability.
Component scores measure source quality, corroboration, and directness. Verdict confidence begins with that evidence strength and applies the deductions documented in the methodology.
Quality and directness of evidence that Musk made the statement.
Quality of evidence establishing the outcome.
Independent corroboration across sources and domains.
How directly the evidence resolves the proposition.
- Evidence sources
- 3
- Independent source domains
- 1
- Claim audit
- Complete
- Source audit
- Pass
Material contestation is documented and resolved or left Unresolved in the row.
Citations
Read the underlying sources.
Field-level evaluation audit
Every calculated output carries its own evidence basis.
Open any of the 12 audited outputs to see its calculated value, written basis, rule, and cited sources.
01Deadline resultNot applicable
Evidence basis
Compared the original target/timeframe (“Present-tense or retrospective claim”) with the documented outcome. Result: Not applicable. Evidence: Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity; Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit; OpenAI says Musk agreed the ChatGPT maker should become a for-profit company. URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
Calculation rule
Compare original target with documented timing.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
02Eventual outcomeNot applicable
Evidence basis
Classified the later real-world result independently from the headline verdict. Result: Not applicable. Documented outcome: Emails from 2015 through 2018 show Musk questioned the nonprofit structure, supported a for-profit, created a proposed public-benefit corporation, and sought control of the new entity. His later objection was not a consistent opposition to any for-profit structure. Evidence: Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity; Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit; OpenAI says Musk agreed the ChatGPT maker should become a for-profit company. URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
Calculation rule
Classify the later real-world outcome separately from the headline verdict.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
03Factual accuracyMisleading
Evidence basis
Compared the normalized proposition with the cited records. Result: Misleading. Documented outcome: Emails from 2015 through 2018 show Musk questioned the nonprofit structure, supported a for-profit, created a proposed public-benefit corporation, and sought control of the new entity. His later objection was not a consistent opposition to any for-profit structure. Evidence: Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity; Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit; OpenAI says Musk agreed the ChatGPT maker should become a for-profit company. URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
Calculation rule
Compare the normalized factual proposition with cited evidence.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
04Canonical verdictMisleading
Evidence basis
Factual-claim rule: apply the published True, Mostly True, Misleading, Unsupported, False, or Unresolved definition. Applied result: Misleading (Misleading). Evidence finding: Emails from 2015 through 2018 show Musk questioned the nonprofit structure, supported a for-profit, created a proposed public-benefit corporation, and sought control of the new entity. His later objection was not a consistent opposition to any for-profit structure. Evidence: Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity; Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit; OpenAI says Musk agreed the ChatGPT maker should become a for-profit company. URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
Calculation rule
Apply strict promise rule or published factual-claim classification.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
05Score points50
Evidence basis
Score assigned mechanically from verdict and claim type under strict-promise-v1.0: Misleading = 50 points.
Calculation rule
Map verdict mechanically to points under the applicable rule.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
06Inclusion in the Trust ScoreYes
Evidence basis
Included because the claim has a resolved evidence-based verdict.
Calculation rule
Include only resolved evidence-based verdicts.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
07Research confidenceMedium
Evidence basis
Evidence strength 80/100 = statement 26/30 + outcome 34/40 + corroboration 8/15 + directness 12/15. Published deductions yield verdict confidence 72/100 (Medium).
Calculation rule
Calculate from evidence components and published deductions.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
08Credible-source contestationYes
Evidence basis
Credible-source contestation: Yes. Resolution: Authenticated emails materially contradicted a consistent anti-for-profit narrative. Evidence URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
Calculation rule
Record material credible-source disagreement separately from verdict.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
09Correction statusNo public correction identified
Evidence basis
Correction status is bounded to the cited record: No public correction identified. Evidence URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
Calculation rule
Bound correction finding to cited evidence.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
10Repetition after correctionNo
Evidence basis
Repeated after correction: No. Minimum documented repetition count: 1. Evidence URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
Calculation rule
Bound repetition finding to cited evidence.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
11Intentional-deception answerNo
Evidence basis
Authenticated emails show Musk advocated a for-profit structure, created a proposed public-benefit corporation, and sought control. That conflicts with a later presentation of consistent opposition, but intent is not conclusively established.
Calculation rule
Require direct admission, adjudicated intent finding, or comparably conclusive state-of-mind evidence.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
12Strict promise resultNot applicable
Evidence basis
Factual-claim rule: apply the published True, Mostly True, Misleading, Unsupported, False, or Unresolved definition. Applied result: Misleading (Misleading). Evidence finding: Emails from 2015 through 2018 show Musk questioned the nonprofit structure, supported a for-profit, created a proposed public-benefit corporation, and sought control of the new entity. His later objection was not a consistent opposition to any for-profit structure. Evidence: Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity; Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit; OpenAI says Musk agreed the ChatGPT maker should become a for-profit company. URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
Calculation rule
Pass only if every material promise or forecast term was met; otherwise Fail, Pending, Unresolved, or Not applicable.
- Evidence strength
- 80 / 100
- Verdict confidence
- 72 / 100 · Medium
- Audit status
- Complete
Audit trail
Selection and scoring notes.
- v5 classification rationale
- Factual-claim rule: apply the published True, Mostly True, Misleading, Unsupported, False, or Unresolved definition. Applied result: Misleading (Misleading). Evidence finding: Emails from 2015 through 2018 show Musk questioned the nonprofit structure, supported a for-profit, created a proposed public-benefit corporation, and sought control of the new entity. His later objection was not a consistent opposition to any for-profit structure. Evidence: Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity; Elon Musk wanted an OpenAI for-profit; OpenAI says Musk agreed the ChatGPT maker should become a for-profit company. URLs: https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-sam-altman-openai-chatgpt-425186c7640aa3d0956e99314a9240e2; https://openai.com/index/elon-musk-wanted-an-openai-for-profit/; https://apnews.com/article/openai-elon-musk-lawsuit-sam-altman-4a4c0a19316f849f65db9e6d2b0b7a6b
- v4 → v5 source-package migration audit
- Audited, no headline change. Evidence and derived statistics re-audited.
- Selection basis
- Material v3 expansion claim selected under published inclusion rules
- Source quality
- Filed allegation, independent AP reporting, and released emails from an adverse party; the emails directly document Musk’s position V4 evidence metrics: statement 26/30; outcome 34/40; corroboration 8/15; directness 12/15.
- Methodology note
- V5 uses strict-promise-v1.0. Later delivery does not earn partial credit for a missed dated promise. Scored under the v3 Misleading category at 50 points. This rating measures demonstrated reliability and does not by itself establish deceptive intent.