I was in the courthouse when Elon Musk testified in his case against OpenAI. Here is what it was like.

• The author was in the Oakland courthouse when Elon Musk testified in his case against OpenAI.
• Musk's testimony started with his life story and ended with a lengthy spar with OpenAI's attorney.
• The presiding judge runs a tight schedule and is not shy about putting billionaires in their place.

The air in Downtown Oakland felt different the morning Elon Musk showed up to testify at the federal court in his high-stakes lawsuit against OpenAI.

"What's going on out there?" a cyclist asked as we waited for the traffic light just shy of 7 am on Tuesday, gesturing to the swarm of police vehicles on the block ahead of us. "Is someone in trouble?"

"That depends," I said, as I rushed to cover the legal soap opera drama unfolding between the world's richest man and his former AI partner, Sam Altman.

Entering the courthouse is a challenge

Musk claims Altman deceived him into donating $38 million to OpenAI's nonprofit, only to abandon its mission to develop AI for the benefit of humanity. He is asking for billions in damages and for Altman to step down as an officer of the for-profit entity.

From day one, the courthouse grounds were teaming with people trying to make a point or just be seen. Protesters against AI and Musk showed up each day. Some wore robot costumes and walked around with a chain around their neck, while others brought a life-sized cutout of Musk. It was like Halloween in April.

I live just a few blocks from the Oakland federal court, and I learned very quickly that the small courthouse is not equipped to handle the frenzy that followed Musk.

Getting inside the courtroom was its own circus show. The court coordinator had to call out line cutters daily and send them to the back of the line. I consistently arrived at the courthouse before 7 am, with a fully charged laptop and a Hydro Flask full of coffee, but I was never able to snag one of the 10 unreserved seats in the main courtroom, forcing me into the overflow room instead.

By 8 am each day, the line would start to snake through the courtyard, taking me to an airport-style security check by 8:15 am. It never gave me enough time to make it inside for the 8:30 am start time.

Mingling with Musk and Altman

It surprised me that both billionaires showed up in person, given the security risks and their work schedules. Altman was present each day for varying lengths of time since Monday, which was jury selection. He always wore a jewel-toned blue suit and brown Oxford shoes and could sometimes be seen in the room during Musk's testimony. Whenever he entered or left the courtroom, his pace was usually very fast, often leaving his legal counsel scrambling to catch up.

Musk, who moved around the courthouse with a noticeably larger entourage compared to Altman, skipped jury selection but showed up Tuesday morning. He took the witness stand that afternoon through Thursday. He wore a solid black suit and black Chelsea boots, and could sometimes be seen snacking during recess.

Musk's initial testimony focused heavily on his life story before he was the world's richest man: He told jurors he was from South Africa, once worked as a lumberjack, and came out of college with $100,000 in student loans. During cross-examination, Musk got cut off many times for giving lengthy explanations to yes-or-no questions, and could not resist the urge to argue with OpenAI's attorney, William Savitt.

Attendees laughed when Musk became flustered over questions about Shivon Zilis, who is the mother of some of his children and his former chief of staff. His repeated references to "The Terminator" also drew chuckles. The room also appreciated the humor of the presiding judge, Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who told the jury about how, when she was still a young judge, she made the mistake of having a big lunch and had to pinch herself to stay awake in the afternoon session.

It is clear that both tech giants highly value this case and are eager to make a good impression on the jury, some of whom shared negative perceptions of Musk and AI during jury selection.

"Look, the reality is that people don't like him," Rogers said of Musk when his attorneys griped about comments made about the Tesla CEO during jury selection.

The non-nonsense judge

Rogers has a very exacting courtroom style and is not shy about putting billionaires and their lawyers in their place.

The presiding judge made it clear from day one that the jury's time must be respected and that the day will start at precisely 8:30 am with a hard cutoff time of 2:00 pm. As early as day two of the trial, she demanded that the lawyers tell her exactly how much time they need with each witness and how long their closing statements will be.

It may be hard to exert authority over the wealthiest person in the world, but Rogers always cuts straight to the point. During Musk's cross-examination, she asked him to "just answer the question" multiple times when he went on tangents, and told him that he is no longer allowed to talk about a hypothetical AI doomsday. On Thursday, when Musk interrupted Savitt's final question and called it "leading," Rogers was quick to remind him that he is not a lawyer.

"Yes, I'm not a lawyer," Musk said. "I did take Law 101, technically."

"You don't have statements on the law," Rogers responded, "At least not in this court."

While I may never become a lawyer either, I do hope that the crowds will trickle out next week enough for me to make it into the courtroom just for a day, preferably without camping on the federal building lawn at 5 am.