Apple takes OpenAI to court over AI hardware

Apple is taking legal action against OpenAI, accusing the AI company of systematically harvesting confidential information with the help of former Apple employees – in order to develop its own AI hardware. The lawsuit paints a detailed picture and doesn't mince words. The timing is significant: both companies are still collaborating on the ChatGPT integration with Siri.

The relationship between Apple and OpenAI has long been strained – OpenAI itself was recently on the verge of taking legal action against Apple because the Siri partnership didn't deliver the expected results. Now Apple is turning the tables and filing a lawsuit in the US Federal Court for the Northern District of California for the theft of trade secrets.

What specific accusations Apple is leveling against OpenAI

At its core describes Apple is accused of a pattern that ran for months, in which various Apple employees allegedly passed on confidential information about unreleased devices, components, manufacturing processes, and supplier relationships to OpenAI. Job interviews at OpenAI were reportedly used to gather information: candidates still employed by Apple were allegedly asked to bring actual hardware components, such as batteries, system-in-package parts, and logic boards, for a kind of "show and tell." In one reported case, an applicant allegedly downloaded files related to a highly confidential Apple project hours before her interview, about which she was subsequently questioned during the interview.

The accusation against a former engineer is particularly serious: After leaving Apple, he allegedly kept an Apple notebook and exploited a security vulnerability to download hundreds of confidential documents – according to the indictment, a collection of technical documents exceeding a thousand pages, including detailed manufacturing documents for complex circuit boards. Furthermore, he is said to have maintained contact with a current Apple employee who provided him with project details. Upon discovering that he still had access to internal Apple systems, he reportedly responded with a dismissive "LOL," according to a quoted message.

Apple's suppliers are also coming under scrutiny: OpenAI is alleged to have persuaded a long-standing Apple partner to use a secret metal refining technique for an OpenAI device – under the false pretense of having Apple's permission. OpenAI is also accused of using industry-standard insider jargon to specifically question a second supplier in the battery and power supply sector about individual Apple components.

Two former Apple managers at the center

The lawsuit names two former Apple employees as defendants. One of them was Vice President of Product Design for iPhone and Apple Watch at Apple and left the company in February 2024 to work with Jony Ive. Apple accuses him of exploiting his insider knowledge of internal exit procedures: He allegedly retained an internal document marked "Need to Know" outlining Apple's security procedures for terminations and passed it on to new OpenAI colleagues before they submitted their resignations to Apple—essentially as a preview of the control mechanisms they intended to circumvent.

The second defendant worked at Apple for eight years as a senior systems electrical engineer before joining OpenAI in January 2026. In addition to these two individuals, the lawsuit also names OpenAI itself and io Products – the hardware startup founded by Ive that acquired OpenAI – as defendants.

OpenAI's hardware ambitions as background

The dispute can only be understood in the context of OpenAI's foray into hardware. The company acquired Ive's startup io last year for approximately $6.5 billion, bringing with it more than 50 engineers and developers; the hardware division is headed by Apple's former design chief. The goal is to launch its first in-house consumer device, but the market launch is under pressure – reports range from a HomePod-like speaker to its own smartphone. Apple argues that this very time pressure has led OpenAI to take shortcuts instead of investing in legitimate in-house development.

What's remarkable is what the lawsuit omits: Neither Ive nor OpenAI CEO Sam Altman are named as defendants, and Apple does not allege any involvement on their part. The ongoing poaching of Apple personnel - more than 400 former Apple employees now work at OpenAI - is also not addressed in the proceedings. Apple is deliberately focusing its allegations on the alleged leakage of specific trade secrets.

OpenAI rejects the allegations

OpenAI reacted The company responded that same day and rejected the accusations. A company spokesperson stated via the microblogging service X that they had "no interest in the trade secrets of others" and would continue to focus on developing technology that benefits people worldwide. There was no substantive discussion of the individual allegations.

This isn't the first dispute of this kind for OpenAI's hardware division. Ive's io Products division previously faced a lawsuit from the hardware startup iyO, which was expanded in March 2026 to include allegations of trade secret breaches – and in which one of the former Apple executives now being sued by Apple is also named as a defendant. OpenAI has denied those allegations as well.

From partner to opposing party

The harshness of the language is unusual: Apple describes OpenAI's hardware business as fundamentally "corrupt" because it is based on stolen information, and speaks of it as "the tip of the iceberg." Apple claims to have contacted OpenAI as early as February, but the company did not respond – prompting Apple to continue its investigation. With this lawsuit, Apple is now seeking an injunction and damages in an amount yet to be determined; Apple is also suing the two named former employees for breach of contract.

The contrast to their ongoing collaboration remains striking: Apple explicitly states that the ChatGPT integration in Siri is not the subject of the lawsuit. This puts two companies on opposing sides, one continuing to cooperate on one level, while the other now taking legal action. How resilient this dual role is will likely become clear in the coming months – as will the question of how much of Apple's dramatic portrayal will withstand judicial scrutiny. (Image: Shutterstock / Thrive Studios ID)