Elon Musk Threatens Legal Action Over Alex Gibney's Four-Hour Documentary

Elon Musk is threatening legal action over Musk, a nearly four-hour documentary by Oscar-winning filmmaker Alex Gibney that premiered this week at the Venice Film Festival, escalating a dispute that began before a single audience had seen the film.

The fight turns on one question: whether the documentary unfairly suggests Musk used his Starlink satellite network to help Donald Trump win the 2024 presidential election. Musk's lawyer says it does and that the claim is false. The filmmakers say they stand by their work and invoke the First Amendment. With a U.S. theatrical release set for Oct. 16, the clash is likely to follow the film home.

The letter

The warning came in a letter dated Sept. 3 from Musk's attorney, Alex Spiro, to Gibney's company, Jigsaw Productions. It objects to what it calls the film's insinuation about Starlink and the election, and states that "Starlink was not connected to vote tabulation," noting that election officials in multiple states had addressed the issue.

The letter tells the filmmakers they are on notice before the film's release that the material refuting the claim is public. It also accuses them of refusing to engage with Musk's team, saying repeated requests for a chance to present the facts went unanswered.

After the Venice premiere on Tuesday, Musk took his objections to X, the social platform he controls. In a series of posts he dismissed the film as boring and a politically motivated "hit piece," questioned Gibney's integrity and attacked him personally. He also disputed an account given in the film by Ashley St. Clair, saying she had a history of making false claims.

The filmmakers respond

Jigsaw Productions defended the documentary, saying Gibney's films are consistently recognized for in-depth, fact-driven examinations of powerful figures and corporations. The company cited First Amendment protections for that kind of reporting.

Gibney has spent decades investigating institutions and individuals who did not want to be examined. His credits include documentaries about Enron, the Church of Scientology and Steve Jobs, and he won an Academy Award for Taxi to the Dark Side, about the use of torture by U.S. forces.

What's in the film

Musk runs 225 minutes, or 235 with an intermission, and screened out of competition in Venice, where it drew a standing ovation of about five minutes. It examines Musk's business empire, his private life and his growing influence in right-wing politics.

Interviewees include Musk's first wife, Justine Musk; St. Clair; Tesla co-founder Martin Eberhard; technology journalists Kara Swisher and Zoë Schiffer; and AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton. Musk did not take part. Its producers include journalists Ronan Farrow and Lawrence Wright.

Early reviews from critics at the festival were overwhelmingly positive.

The legal bar

Any defamation claim would face a high hurdle. Under U.S. law, public figures must show not only that a statement was false and damaging but that it was made with actual malice, meaning the maker knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Documentaries that frame questions or present the views of interviewees, rather than asserting facts directly, can be especially difficult targets.

Warning letters of this kind are also a common tactic before a release, signaling to distributors and broadcasters that a subject is prepared to litigate. It is not yet clear whether Musk intends to go further.

What happens next

Bleecker Street is scheduled to release Musk in U.S. theaters on Oct. 16, with Universal Pictures handling international distribution. No lawsuit had been filed as of Thursday. If one is, the case would test how far a documentary can go in examining the political reach of the world's richest man before it crosses a legal line.

Image: Debbie Rowe via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0