OpenAI has filed a motion to dismiss Apple's trade secrets lawsuit, arguing that Apple's own security practices and offboarding procedures undermine its claim that the allegedly stolen information qualifies as legally protected trade secrets. The motion, filed this week in federal court, shifts the focus from whether former Apple employees at OpenAI accessed confidential data to how Apple managed its internal information security. Apple's original complaint, filed in July, accuses OpenAI of orchestrating a coordinated scheme to extract confidential hardware information from departing Apple engineers.
In its dismissal motion, OpenAI contends that Apple allowed employees to use personal iCloud accounts for work purposes and failed to properly revoke access after they left the company. The filing includes text message records showing that an Apple manager remained logged into the personal iCloud account of defendant Chang Liu, a former Apple engineer, after his departure to transfer files and later asked him for technical assistance on Apple projects. OpenAI argues that Apple omitted the consequences of its own "inexplicable information-management practices" from the complaint, suggesting that Apple's failure to secure systems upon employee departures created confusion and unauthorized access that Apple now characterizes as theft.
What's New
OpenAI's motion to dismiss reveals a defense strategy centered on Apple's security hygiene rather than disputing whether specific information was accessed. The AI company submitted exhibits showing that Apple's offboarding processes were inconsistent, including the iCloud access issue involving Chang Liu. OpenAI also argues that Apple has failed to specify which particular trade secrets or confidential components were allegedly stolen, referring instead to "generic categories of the product-development process—such as component manufacturing, product testing, vendor and supplier relationships, and distribution channels." The motion asserts that OpenAI "has no use, need or desire for Apple's trade secrets" and is "building something entirely new and different from anything at Apple." OpenAI further posits that Apple is using the lawsuit to slow down a competitor innovating in AI-powered hardware rather than focusing on its own product plans, stating that "Apple should not be permitted to use a baseless and pretextual lawsuit to make up for its shortcomings in the market for talent and retaining its employees, and its failures to integrate AI into its products." Apple has asked the court to expedite discovery, citing an internal investigation indicating additional former employees may have participated in or witnessed the alleged theft.
- OpenAI filed motion to dismiss Apple's trade secrets lawsuit in early August 2026
- Motion argues Apple's security practices — including personal iCloud use and inadequate offboarding — undermine trade secret protection claims
- Exhibits include text messages showing Apple manager accessed former engineer Chang Liu's personal iCloud after departure
- OpenAI claims Apple hasn't specified concrete trade secrets, citing only generic product-development categories
- Apple filed original complaint in July 2026; now seeks expedited discovery
- Over 400 former Apple employees now work at OpenAI, per Apple's complaint
- io, founded by Jony Ive and acquired by OpenAI for $6.5 billion, is also named as defendant
- Apple alleges OpenAI coached departing employees to evade the "dreaded walkout" and circulated internal "Need to know" documents
- Complaint says OpenAI directed job candidates to bring actual Apple parts, CAD artifacts, and prototypes to interviews
Why It Matters
This case highlights escalating tensions between technology giants over talent acquisition and intellectual property in the rapidly evolving AI hardware space. The outcome could set significant precedents for how trade secrets are defined and protected in the technology industry, particularly when employee mobility is high and security practices vary across organizations. Apple's complaint paints a picture of systematic misconduct, alleging that OpenAI coached departing employees on evading security procedures, directed job candidates to bring actual Apple parts and design artifacts to interviews, and circulated internal Apple documents marked "Need to know" to new hires. The complaint also alleges that OpenAI approached suppliers using Apple's confidential information about design and components, using internal terminology only Apple insiders would know.
The legal battle also centers on io, the hardware startup founded by former Apple design chief Jony Ive that OpenAI acquired last year in a $6.5 billion deal. Apple alleges that io misled an Apple manufacturing partner into believing it had permission to use a confidential metal-finishing technique. With over 400 former Apple employees now at OpenAI, Apple argues the scale of potential information transfer is substantial. OpenAI's counterargument — that Apple's lax security practices mean the information was never properly protected as trade secrets — could reshape how courts evaluate trade secret claims in environments where personal cloud services and bring-your-own-device policies blur corporate boundaries. The case also reflects broader competitive dynamics: OpenAI is rumored to be developing AI-powered hardware that could challenge Apple's device ecosystem, making the talent war particularly consequential.
Beyond the immediate parties, the dispute raises questions about the adequacy of corporate offboarding controls in an era where engineers routinely use personal cloud accounts for work. If a court accepts OpenAI's argument that Apple's failure to revoke iCloud access negates trade‑secret status, other companies may face pressure to tighten departure procedures or risk weakening their own IP claims. Conversely, a ruling that deliberate coaching to evade security controls constitutes misappropriation regardless of the victim's security posture would reinforce the principle that reasonable efforts — not perfect security — are the legal standard.
Our Take
OpenAI's motion represents a calculated legal strategy that reframes the narrative from alleged theft to inadequate protection. By highlighting Apple's own security lapses — particularly the iCloud access issue — OpenAI attempts to establish that the information in question lacked the reasonable secrecy measures required for trade secret status under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and state law equivalents. This approach carries risks: courts may view the "door was unlocked" argument as insufficient to excuse deliberate acquisition of confidential information, especially given the detailed allegations in Apple's complaint about coaching employees to evade security controls. However, the motion also serves a strategic purpose beyond the courtroom. It signals to current and prospective employees — particularly those at Apple — that OpenAI views the lawsuit as pretextual retaliation for talent competition rather than legitimate IP protection. The emphasis on building "something entirely new and different" reinforces OpenAI's positioning as an innovator rather than an imitator. Whether this narrative resonates with a judge remains to be seen, but it clearly aims to shape both legal and public perception of the dispute.
The breadth of Apple's allegations — spanning recruitment tactics, supplier communications, and the io acquisition — suggests the company is prepared for a protracted discovery fight that could expose internal OpenAI communications. OpenAI's dismissal bid, if denied, will force the case into a fact‑intensive phase where the credibility of each side's security practices and intent will be tested. For the industry, the case may become a reference point for how courts balance employer security obligations against employee mobility in high‑stakes AI hardware development.
FAQ
What is the core of OpenAI's defense against Apple's lawsuit?
OpenAI argues that Apple's own security practices — including allowing employees to use personal iCloud accounts for work and failing to revoke access after departure — undermine its claim that the allegedly stolen information qualifies as legally protected trade secrets. The motion contends Apple has not specified concrete trade secrets, citing only generic product-development categories.
What specific evidence did OpenAI submit with its motion?
OpenAI submitted text message records showing an Apple manager remained logged into former engineer Chang Liu's personal iCloud account after he left the company, using it to transfer files and later asking him for technical help on Apple projects. The filing also references Apple's broader offboarding failures.
What does Apple allege in its original complaint?
Apple's July complaint accuses OpenAI of orchestrating a scheme to obtain confidential hardware information from former Apple engineers. It alleges OpenAI coached departing employees to evade security procedures, directed job candidates to bring Apple parts and design artifacts to interviews, circulated internal "Need to know" documents, and approached suppliers using Apple's confidential information and internal terminology.
How many former Apple employees now work at OpenAI?
Apple's complaint states that over 400 former Apple employees now work at OpenAI, a figure Apple uses to argue the potential scale of trade secret exposure is substantial.
What role does io play in this lawsuit?
io, the hardware startup founded by Jony Ive and acquired by OpenAI for $6.5 billion, is named as a defendant. Apple alleges io misled an Apple manufacturing partner into believing it had permission to use a confidential metal-finishing technique, and that io exploited Apple's secret industrial design techniques and processes.
