Summary of the Core Issues
The legal battle over trade secrets between Apple and OpenAI has taken a dramatic turn: Apple accuses former employees of stealing core secrets related to iPhones, Apple Watches, and other hardware when they joined OpenAI, and has sought a restraining order to prevent OpenAI from using this information. However, OpenAI has counterattacked with emails and chat records, claiming that Apple's allegations are misleading and even exposing flaws in Apple's own management (such as unfinished clearance of former employees' access rights and incorrect emails sent by lawyers). On the surface, this case seems to be about stealing trade secrets, but in reality, it's a battle for control over the next generation of AI hardware. Apple is trying to defend its decades-long dominance in consumer electronics, while OpenAI is proving the legitimacy of its hardware development.
The Trigger for This Case: Apple Claims Former Employees Took Core Secrets
In July this year, Apple sued two former employees—senior engineer Chang Liu and former vice president of product design Tang Tan (who now lead OpenAI's hardware division)—alleging that they took away confidential design drawings, supply chain secrets, and manufacturing processes related to the iPhone and Apple Watch. Apple fears that if these secrets fall into OpenAI's hands, it will suffer significant losses, which led to the application for a preliminary restraining order in August, requesting the court to prohibit OpenAI and the two employees from accessing any of Apple's confidential information and requiring them to testify.
OpenAI's Counterattack: Evidence Shows Apple Made Mistakes
OpenAI published an article titled “Apple Got It Wrong,” presenting a series of evidence:
1. Apple claims no response from OpenAI? The lawyers sent the wrong emails: Apple’s external lawyers confused the surnames of the two Asian employees and sent the emails to the wrong people. After discovering this, OpenAI reminded them, and Apple’s lawyers acknowledged their mistake.
2. Claims that employees stole files after leaving? In fact, Apple’s current employees asked them for help: OpenAI provided iMessage chat records showing that even after Chang Liu left in January 2026, Apple’s employees were still reaching out to him for previous project documents.
3. Employees could access files? Apple failed to secure the necessary permissions: Chang Liu was still able to view some files after leaving, indicating that Apple’s internal systems were not properly configured; specifically, the iCloud sharing permissions were not disabled, which Apple used as evidence to accuse the employees of unauthorized access.
OpenAI also pointed out that while Apple is known for its attention to detail, this case shows a lack of rigor and emotionality, which does not align with its reputation. They stated that they have not taken or wanted any of Apple’s trade secrets.
Apple’s Internal Flaws: Poor Management of Former Employees’ Access Rights
This counterattack has exposed some issues in Apple’s internal management:
- Employee access rights were not properly cleared after they left the company, allowing former employees to still access company files. This is a failure on Apple’s part, yet they are now accusing the employees of theft.
- The carelessness of external lawyers (mixing up employees’ surnames and sending wrong emails) indicates that Apple may not have handled the lawsuit with sufficient diligence, providing OpenAI with a leverage in their defense.
The Bigger Picture: The Battle for Control over Next-Generation AI Hardware
This case is more about who will dominate the development of future AI hardware:
- Apple’s concerns: As AI models become more powerful, there may be “native AI devices” (such as AI-powered glasses or watches) that do not rely on traditional smartphone systems like iOS. Apple has built its success on the iPhone and its supply chain for decades, and it fears that next-generation AI devices could threaten this dominance. Therefore, it is eager to use a restraining order to protect its supply chain and design secrets.
- OpenAI’s needs: OpenAI wants to develop its own hardware (through its subsidiary io Products) and must prove that its technology is independent of Apple’s. Otherwise, not only would they lose the lawsuit, but their future hardware products would also be unable to be sold, let alone compete with Apple.
OpenAI’s recent victory against Elon Musk has made this case a focal point in Silicon Valley, representing a direct confrontation between a new AI player and a traditional tech giant.
Future Developments
The court has not yet ruled on Apple’s restraining order request, and Apple has not responded to OpenAI’s open letter. Possible outcomes include:
- The court may first assess the validity of OpenAI’s evidence; if Apple’s allegations are found to be misleading, the restraining order could be dismissed.
- The two companies might settle privately, but given the competition in AI hardware, reaching an agreement could be challenging.
- Regardless of the outcome, this case will influence their strategies in the AI hardware sector: Apple will likely place greater emphasis on managing employee access rights, while OpenAI will need to be more cautious about compliance issues.
In summary, this dispute is not trivial; it determines who will control the future development of the AI devices we use.