But such devices have the potential to undermine sales of Apple\u2019s phones, which still represent the majority of that company\u2019s revenue.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cApple has good motivation to fight this out,\u201d said Vince Joralemon, a senior fellow at UC Berkeley\u2019s Center for Law and Technology.<\/p>\n
On the flip side, if Apple tries to get a court order barring or delaying OpenAI from selling devices, the AI company \u201cwill have to fight tooth and nail on this,\u201d he said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In the lawsuit, Apple alleges that OpenAI has been stealing its trade secrets via current and former employees and suppliers. Trade secrets can cover a wide variety of information, including not just in-development product designs, but the prices a company pays for services or goods, its list of suppliers and how it does quality-assurance testing \u2014 as long as the company has made an effort to keep such information secret.<\/p>\n
According to the lawsuit, more than 400 Apple employees have gone to work for OpenAI. Apple charges that at least some of them have intentionally taken the company\u2019s trade secrets with them to the AI company.<\/p>\n
Apple also alleges that OpenAI officials have used hiring interviews to induce Apple employees who are seeking jobs at the ChatGPT developer to disclose such confidential information.<\/p>\n
Apple specifically calls out two former employees for participating in the alleged scheme: Tang Tan, who is OpenAI\u2019s chief hardware officer, and Chang Liu, a technical staff member at the AI company.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Tan co-founded AI-device startup Io with Jony Ive, Apple\u2019s legendary former chief designer. He joined OpenAI last July when it acquired Io<\/a>\u00a0\u2014\u00a0which is also named in the suit \u2014 for $6.5 billion.<\/p>\n Prior to that, Tan had worked at Apple for 24 years, eventually becoming a vice president in charge of product design, overseeing the iPhone and Apple Watch, according to the lawsuit.\u00a0<\/p>\n A screen capture from a video shows Jony Ive and Sam Altman discussing the acquisition of Io, Ive\u2019s gadget startup.<\/p>\n Courtesy of OpenAI<\/p>\n In interviews with Apple employees applying for jobs at OpenAI, Tan has solicited secret information about unreleased products by referring to them by their code names, according to the lawsuit. He\u2019s also directed them to bring confidential parts and products to their interviews, Apple said in its complaint.<\/p>\n The lawsuit also alleges that Tan kept a secret Apple document that details the steps the company takes to secure its confidential information when employees leave. He\u2019s shared that document with Apple employees before they notify Apple that they are departing, so they know how to evade such measures, the company said in its complaint.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Liu joined OpenAI in January after working at Apple for eight years as a senior system electrical engineer. While at Apple, he worked on some of its top-secret product-development efforts, according to the lawsuit.<\/p>\n Apple\u2019s complaint alleges that when Liu left the company, he failed to turn in a company-issued laptop, and he didn\u2019t respond when the company attempted to set up an exit interview with him to confirm that he\u2019d handed over his devices and was aware of his confidentiality agreement. After he\u2019d already joined OpenAI, he also exploited a hole in Apple\u2019s authentication system to download confidential information, according to the lawsuit.<\/p>\n Additionally, he coached another Apple employee who was applying to work at OpenAI on how to access confidential information without alerting Apple\u2019s security team, Apple said in its complaint. He also advised her on what secret information to study before her interview with OpenAI, according to the lawsuit.<\/p>\n Apple alleges that what Tan and Liu did were part of a broader effort by OpenAI and Io to steal its confidential information. In interviews, prospective employees of the AI company met with panels of people who pressed them about secret projects and operations, according to the lawsuit.<\/p>\n OpenAI also convinced an Apple supplier to use an confidential Apple-owned metal-finishing technique on a product, misleading the supplier to believe OpenAI had Apple\u2019s permission, according to the complaint. OpenAI tried to get information about Apple\u2019s confidential components from another supplier by using the latter\u2019s secret terminology, according to the lawsuit.<\/p>\n OpenAI is taking all these steps \u201cto advance [its] efforts to enter the consumer hardware market,\u201d Apple said in the complaint.<\/p>\n \u201cOpenAI\u2019s nascent hardware business now rests on the shakiest of foundations, rotten to its core by its illegal reliance on misappropriated trade secrets,\u201d it said in the complaint.<\/p>\n Apple representatives hadn\u2019t responded to an email seeking comment about the lawsuit as of press time.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Anthro Energy\u2019s technology could allow battery makers to pack more energy into them, helping cars drive farther or smartphones go longer between charges<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Big funding rounds raised by San Francisco-based OpenAI and Anthropic have boosted the tally \u2014 and helped concentrate venture dollars in the Bay Area<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
“Arrivals” lands at the Ferry Building this month, bringing six artists spanning different media to The City’s waterfront<\/p>\n \u201cWe have no interest in other companies\u2019 trade secrets,\u201d Pusateri said. \u201cWe remain focused on building innovative technology that empowers people everywhere.\u201d<\/p>\n Eric Goldman, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law: \u201cThat story often changes over the course of the lawsuit, and often it starts falling apart, pieces start dropping out, when it\u2019s clear that the plaintiff overclaimed.\u201d<\/p>\n Craig Lee\/The Examiner<\/p>\n Because OpenAI hasn\u2019t yet responded to Apple\u2019s charges, it\u2019s hard to know exactly how strong a case the iPhone maker has, legal experts said. The initial complaint typically represents the very best story the plaintiff can make about what happened, said Goldman, who is the co-director of the Datta Center for High Tech Law at Santa Clara University.<\/p>\n \u201cThat story often changes over the course of the lawsuit, and often it starts falling apart, pieces start dropping out, when it\u2019s clear that the plaintiff overclaimed,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Indeed, there\u2019s reason to think that at least some of what Apple is alleging is actually legal, said Mark Lemley, a professor at Stanford University\u2019s law school.<\/p>\n There\u2019s nothing wrong, necessarily, with OpenAI hiring people away from Apple or even coaching them on how to leave the iPhone maker, he said.<\/p>\n Such steps \u201cmay actually be part of good business practice,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n That said, if employees did actually take Apple trade secrets with them to OpenAI and the latter used them, \u201cthat is a problem for OpenAI,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n It\u2019s also a problem for the employees themselves, the legal experts said.<\/p>\n Liu, especially, could be in legal jeopardy, Joralemon said. According to the complaint, Liu didn\u2019t just keep an Apple laptop and exploit a security hole \u2014 he boasted about the latter to the Apple employee he was coaching for an interview with OpenAI, saying it was \u201cso funny.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThat doesn\u2019t look good,\u201d Joralemon said. \u201cI wouldn\u2019t want to be his lawyer.\u201d<\/p>\n Liu did not respond to a request for comment sent through LinkedIn.<\/p>\n A big hurdle for Apple is going to be proving that OpenAI the company \u2014 not just individuals within it \u2014 was aware of the alleged theft of the its trade secrets, said Camilla Hrdy, a professor at Rutgers Law School.<\/p>\n Last year, xAI, Elon Musk\u2019s artificial-intelligence company, similarly accused OpenAI of hiring its employees to steal its trade secrets<\/a>, Hrdy noted. But a judge dismissed that case<\/a>, finding that there wasn\u2019t sufficient evidence to show that OpenAI induced such theft or even knew that a particular employee had disclosed trade secrets.<\/p>\n Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, arrives at the U.S. District Court in Oakland in April 30, 2026. OpenAI was being sued by Elon Musk over its conversion to a for-profit company.<\/p>\n Godofredo A. V\u00e1squez\/Associated Press<\/p>\n What OpenAI knew with regards to Apple\u2019s trade secrets \u201cis going to be a really big question,\u201d Hrdy said.\u00a0<\/p>\n There will likely be two crucial moments for the case in coming months, the experts said \u2014 OpenAI will move to dismiss the case, and the court will hold a hearing on Apple\u2019s request for a preliminary injunction against the AI company.<\/p>\n If the judge denies the motion to dismiss, Apple can proceed on to the discovery phase, during which it can seek additional evidence to prove its case and attempt to tie OpenAI more closely to the alleged theft.<\/p>\n The hearing on the preliminary injunction will be like a mini-trial, the outcome of which will be a good indication of how the case will pan out, said Elizabeth Rowe, a professor at the University of Virginia\u2019s law school.<\/p>\n It\u2019s likely Apple will be able to fend off the motion to dismiss, just because of the allegations it\u2019s already made, she said \u2014 but how the judge will come down on injunction is anyone\u2019s guess.<\/p>\n Regardless, no one should expect a quick resolution of this case, given what\u2019s at stake and the parties involved, said Rowe, who is also the director of Virginia\u2019s Center on Intellectual Property Law. The Apple-OpenAI battle is a \u201cbet the company\u201d case, she said.<\/p>\n \u201cIt has all of the makings, from what we\u2019ve seen so far, of a case that could go quite a way,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/682e6781ec2fe.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/6a505b2c48584.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/6a29b0e6394a1.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/6864983d6ad62.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/69716bd30a394.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/6a4ecc6fc307b.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n