Apple has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and two former senior employees, accusing the artificial intelligence company of using stolen trade secrets to accelerate its push into the consumer hardware market.
The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges that OpenAI orchestrated a coordinated effort to obtain Apple’s confidential hardware information through former employees, recruitment activities and supplier relationships.
According to Apple, the alleged scheme was designed to fast-track OpenAI’s plans to develop consumer devices capable of competing with products such as the iPhone.
Responding to the lawsuit, OpenAI denied the allegations.
“We have no interest in other companies’ trade secrets. We remain focused on building innovative technology that empowers people everywhere,” the company said in a statement.
The case marks a significant escalation in tensions between the two firms as competition in the artificial intelligence industry intensifies.
Industry analysts believe OpenAI is developing its own consumer device, potentially reducing its reliance on Apple’s ecosystem.
Paolo Pescatore, an analyst at PP Foresight, said the dispute reflects a rapidly changing relationship between the companies.
“Apple now sees OpenAI shifting from partner to potential rival, while OpenAI is looking to build a direct relationship with consumers instead of depending on the iPhone. Even if the allegations are never proven, the lawsuit could slow OpenAI’s hardware ambitions and deepen the strain in what has become an increasingly fragile partnership,” he said.
The lawsuit names former Apple senior systems electrical engineer Chang Liu and former Apple vice president of product design Tang Yew Tan as defendants.
Tan now serves as OpenAI’s head of hardware. Neither immediately responded to requests for comment.
Apple alleges that Liu failed to return a company-issued laptop after leaving the firm and later exploited an authentication vulnerability to access Apple’s internal network, downloading dozens of confidential hardware-related files.
The company also claims Tan spent months collecting sensitive information before his departure, emailing himself confidential details about Apple suppliers and internal industry reports. Apple alleges he later used that information to benefit OpenAI’s hardware programme.
According to the complaint, Tan also encouraged Apple employees interviewing for jobs at OpenAI to bring company components to what were described as “show-and-tell” sessions. Apple cited one candidate as allegedly remarking, “I didn’t even know we could take those from the office.”
The lawsuit also names OpenAI Foundation, OpenAI Group PBC and io Products—an AI hardware startup acquired by OpenAI—as defendants.
Apple said it contacted OpenAI in February after learning that its confidential information may have reached the company and requested discussions to address its concerns. The company claims OpenAI never responded.
While noting that more than 400 former Apple employees now work at OpenAI, Apple stressed that hiring former staff does not give the company the right to use confidential information acquired during their employment.
“That OpenAI now employs people who were once entrusted with Apple’s trade secrets does not entitle OpenAI to use that information to jumpstart its hardware efforts,” the company said.
Apple further alleges that OpenAI employees approached Apple suppliers seeking access to confidential manufacturing techniques, including asking one supplier to perform a proprietary metal-finishing process under the impression that Apple had authorised the request.
Legal experts say the case could have significant implications if Apple’s allegations are substantiated.
Stanford Law School professor Mark Lemley said that while hiring employees from competitors is common in the technology industry, the situation changes if confidential information is taken and used.
“If Apple’s claims that the employees took confidential documents with them and that OpenAI is using those documents are true, that is a problem for OpenAI,” he said.
Rutgers Law School professor Camilla Hrdy noted that most recent AI-related trade secrets disputes have focused on software, making this case unusual because it centres on hardware development.
“These trade secret lawsuits are common in the technology sector, and we usually learn much more as the case progresses. OpenAI is well-positioned to defend itself, so this is likely to be a closely watched legal battle,” she said.
