OpenAI Drags Apple’s Lawsuit Into the Court of Public Opinion

OpenAI has launched a public offensive against Apple’s lawsuit, publishing a detailed rebuttal titled ‘Apple is getting this wrong.’ The post labels the legal action as ‘careless, aggressive, and oddly personal’ and shares internal communications to counter Apple’s allegations of intellectual property theft by former employees.

Key takeaways

• OpenAI published a blog post calling Apple’s lawsuit ‘careless, aggressive, and oddly personal.’
• The company is sharing iMessage and email exchanges to publicly challenge Apple’s version of events.
• OpenAI refutes core allegations, stating it does not have nor want Apple’s trade secrets.
• The rebuttal addresses specific accusations against former Apple employees Chang Liu and Tang Tan.
• OpenAI claims Apple’s request for a preliminary injunction is based on false information and unnecessary.

OpenAI’s Public Rebuttal and Core Allegations

In a blog post titled “Apple is getting this wrong,” OpenAI labeled Apple’s lawsuit “careless, aggressive, and oddly personal.” The post shares iMessage and email exchanges to challenge Apple’s version of events, an attempt to sway public opinion outside of a formal legal filing.

The lawsuit centers on former Apple employees Chang Liu and Tang Tan. Apple alleges they took confidential information on unreleased technologies to advance OpenAI’s hardware plans. OpenAI’s rebuttal directly addresses specific accusations. Regarding Liu, OpenAI states Apple contacted him for help locating information, shifting blame to Apple’s own “residual access” problem from poor system management when people leave.

Countering Apple’s Claims

OpenAI claims Apple’s request for a preliminary injunction is unnecessary, stating “we do not have, nor want, any of their trade secrets.” The company also refutes allegations of non-cooperation, asserting Apple’s lawyers emailed the wrong person after confusing two Asian last names and never spoke with OpenAI’s General Counsel. Concerning Tan, OpenAI states he has always been clear that the company must not use confidential information from other firms.

Dispute Over Employee Actions and Access

Apple’s lawsuit alleges that former employee Chang Liu failed to return a company-owned computer and used an authentication vulnerability to access Apple’s cloud-based network storage weeks after his departure, downloading confidential files. The suit further claims Liu instructed a colleague on how to access files and “avoid trouble” with security ahead of her move to OpenAI.

OpenAI’s Counterclaims

OpenAI counters that Apple employees themselves reached out to Liu and asked for his help to locate information. The company states Apple is blaming “residual access,” a common issue caused by Apple failing to properly manage system access when people leave. OpenAI claims this results in former employees retaining access to files despite not wanting it.

Regarding former Apple executive Tang Tan, Apple alleges he asked for confidential Apple information during interviews with Apple employees for OpenAI jobs and instructed them to showcase Apple components. OpenAI states that Tan “has always been clear with the team that we do not want, and must not use, any confidential information from other companies.”

Legal Procedural Disputes and Published Evidence

Apple requested a preliminary injunction to prevent former employees Chang Liu and Tang Tan, along with OpenAI, from accessing or using alleged confidential information during the lawsuit. In a public blog post, OpenAI called this request “based on false information and completely unnecessary,” asserting the company does not have nor want Apple’s trade secrets.

OpenAI also refuted claims that it did not respond to Apple’s initial legal inquiries. The company stated that Apple’s outside lawyers “emailed the wrong person after confusing two Asian last names” and conceded it had not contacted OpenAI’s General Counsel. To support its position, OpenAI published the full email and iMessage exchanges between legal counsel and Liu on its blog as direct evidence challenging Apple’s narrative.