OpenAI Response to Apple Trade Secret Lawsuit

OpenAI Alleges Apple Lawsuit Based on False Information

OpenAI has publicly challenged a lawsuit filed by Apple, asserting that the claims regarding the theft of trade secrets are based on inaccurate information and a failure by Apple to manage its own internal system access. OpenAI contends that it does not possess, nor desire, Apple's trade secrets and that the legal action is an unnecessary attempt to change a narrative through vague accusations.

Disputed Claims Regarding Employee Conduct

OpenAI specifically disputes allegations against two former Apple employees, Chang Liu and Tang Tan:

The Case of Chang Liu

OpenAI claims that Apple's accusation that Chang Liu accessed confidential information after leaving the company is contradicted by Apple's own internal communications. OpenAI provided iMessage transcripts suggesting that Apple employees reached out to Liu after his departure on January 22, 2026, asking for his assistance in locating files and information to help them with their work.

OpenAI further argues that any "residual access" Liu may have had was a result of Apple's failure to properly manage system access for departing employees, noting that former staff often retain access to files without wanting them or being aware of them.

The Case of Tang Tan

Regarding Tang Tan, a 24-year veteran of Apple, OpenAI asserts that Tan has been explicit with the team that no confidential information from other companies should be used. OpenAI describes Tan as one of the most innovative leaders during his tenure at Apple.

Allegations of Legal Mismanagement by Apple

OpenAI alleges that Apple's legal approach has been characterized by carelessness and inaccuracy:

  • Communication Errors: OpenAI claims Apple's outside counsel emailed the wrong person after confusing two Asian last names, an error Apple only admitted after it was brought to their attention.
  • False Claims of Discussion: OpenAI asserts that Apple claimed to have had a discussion with OpenAI's General Counsel that never actually occurred.
  • Lack of Notice: OpenAI states that Apple never raised the specific allegations found in the lawsuit during their initial correspondence and remained silent for five months before filing the suit.

Community and Technical Critique

Following the publication of OpenAI's response, technical and legal commentators on Hacker News raised several points of contention regarding the evidence and the strategy:

  • Interpretation of Evidence: Some observers argue that the provided iMessage transcripts do not support OpenAI's claims. One commenter noted that the transcripts appear to show Chang Liu asking for help to copy data, rather than Apple employees initiating the request for data retrieval.

  • Professionalism and Strategy: A significant portion of the discussion focused on the unconventional nature of the public response. Critics described the blog post as "amateurish" and "emotionally charged," suggesting that publicizing an ongoing legal battle via a company blog is a breach of standard corporate legal strategy.

  • Security Practices: Commentators questioned the security protocols of both companies, noting that the use of personal iCloud accounts for corporate work—as suggested by the transcripts—represents a significant security risk and a lack of professional infrastructure.

"Is public opinion about this case so important to them? ... Companies are generally pretty tight-lipped about active litigation outside court documents."

"I can't see a judge looking kindly on this being published prior to trial. It's in court already, fight it there."

Sources