Altman’s Affidavit Dare: Escalating the Musk Feud Over X’s Algorithm
One of the most interesting feuds in the history of tech was finally resolved on August 12, 2025, when OpenAI founder and CEO Sam Altman stepped forward and offered Elon Musk one last chance to try to put the conflict behind him by issuing a signed affidavit stating/confirming that X was not manipulated in any way, and Altman would publicly apologise. This is an aggressive move, as Musk accused Apple of rigging the App Store in order to promote ChatGPT over the Grok image recognition app built by xAI. The debut, which is playing out on X, has riveted millions, as personal insults, legal threats, and concerns about the power that platforms wield have been traded. To international observers, particularly in the Indian AI bubble that has swelled in recent years, this wrangle sheds light on the ethical considerations and competition issues driving the sector.
Bringing us to 2015 when, on his part, Musk and Altman co-founded OpenAI as a non-profit entity to come up with safe, beneficial AI for humanity. The board-Musk tensions emerged in 2018 when Musk insisted on a transition towards for-profit operations to speed up the pace of work that had some controversial effects. He resigned after clashing with investigations in Tesla AI work and lost funding. Around this time Musk had departed OpenAI, of which he commented he viewed AI as potentially more dangerous than nukes. Since that time, Musk has spoken out against the change of OpenAI to a capped-profit model and its alliance with Microsoft, saying that OpenAI betrayed him. In 2023, Musk founded xAI to compete head-to-head with OpenAI, investing billions and merging it with X. OpenAI faced a lawsuit in 2024, launched by Musk over violation of its founding mission, to prohibit its full conversion to for-profit status—a request denied by a California judge. OpenAI responded in 2025, accusing Musk of an ongoing campaign to destroy their firm, including an unsolicited acquisition offer of $97.4 billion in February that was alleged to be a stunt to drive up valuations and scare away investors.
The newest twist began a few days ago when Musk accused Apple of antitrust infringements after its App Store allegedly made it impossible forany non-OpenAI AI apps to dominate the charts. Musk said xAI would file suit immediately, and ChatGPT was soaring, and Grok was in 5th position. Altman responded, describing the accusation as extraordinary given the accusations that Musk manipulates the algorithm of X to promote his firms and punish competitors. Citing a Platformer report on Musk’s post-purchase modifications, Altman cited that Musk makes his tweets a priority. It is 4 a.m. when Musk fires back: “On your bullshit post alone you received 3M views. You lie; it is much more than I have received even on many of my posts, despite having 50 times your follower count!” The 224 million followers of Musk are much bigger than the following of Altman, 4.5 million.
Altman responded surgically with “skill issue or bots,” and then came the affidavit challenge. Will you pledge in a sworn deposition that you have never instructed alterations to the X algorithm in a manner that has had an adverse effect on rivals or a beneficial effect on your other businesses? I shall apologise, either way: Such an increase, described in CNBC and Times of India publications, focuses the attention not on Apple but on the transparency of X. The star of Tesla has not responded specifically to the challenge, but this could compel some disclosures about potential lawsuits, given current U.S. antitrust litigation against tech giants.
Ironically, the Grok chatbot that Musk himself created similarly voted on the side of Altman releasing a statement that it also had verified evidence of Musk tampering with his algorithm and said that other apps such as DeepSeek and Perplexity were also ranking highly on the App Store, proving that Musk did not have a monopoly. Calling it just a fabrication of the legacy media, he cited “false defamatory statements” and pledged all this will be corrected. ChatGPT, in its turn, chose Musk as more trustworthy, as can be seen in a screenshot he shared. This crossover chatbot points to the unpredictable nature of AI because most tools were programmed using public data over which they do not remain loyal.
This scandal is of interest in India, where X is the platform of 22 million people and the AI market is estimated to reach 17 billion dollars by 2027 (Statista data). The Indian AI startups like Krutrim and Sarvam are not only competing globally but also are depending on platforms like X to get visibility and app stores to distribute. Due to allegations of bias, CCI investigations could be triggered corresponding to the Europe DMA investigations of the tactics employed by Apple. According to a 2023 study conducted by Pew Research, algorithms tend to prioritise accounts with a high number of followers, which makes Musk look more dubious in the situation in the market where influencers are a key tool in driving engagement. The incumbents have yet another advantage in the form of transparent platforms that guarantee fairness since AI solutions such as ChatGPT and Siri are causing a tilt in the game.
Distinctive perspectives arise: the threats made by Musk against Apple, which is experiencing battles with Epic Games and the 30 percent Apple charges in the App Store, might enhance the antitrust discussions, which could be in support of the smaller players. Altman is also accountable, as he is willing to apologise in case he is incorrect, unlike Musk, whose manner is aggressive. This is not mere ego on the part of OpenAI as it seeks a valuation of $500 billion, and xAI gets built into the platform of Tesla, but one that requires dominance by AI. The affidavit may expose the innermost workings of X that may have an impact on the laws governing the world. At the moment, the technical community waits: Will Musk sign, or will the confrontation develop further?
Disclaimer
The information presented in this blog is derived from publicly available sources for general use, including any cited references. While we strive to mention credible sources whenever possible, Web Techneeq – Web Design Company in Mumbai does not guarantee the accuracy of the information provided in any way. This article is intended solely for general informational purposes. It should be understood that it does not constitute legal advice and does not aim to serve as such. If any individual(s) make decisions based on the information in this article without verifying the facts, we explicitly reject any liability that may arise as a result. We recommend that readers seek separate guidance regarding any specific information provided here.