Apple sued OpenAI in early August 2026, accusing former employees of stealing trade secrets. The complaint paints OpenAI as careless, but the details OpenAI released tell a different story.
Background
OpenAI says Apple's claim rests on a series of missteps that never happened. Apple alleged it reached out in February, got no reply, and then filed suit five months later. OpenAI's blog notes that Apple's lawyers actually emailed the wrong person after confusing two Asian last names, and that Apple never raised the specific allegations at the time (OpenAI, 2026). The claim that Apple discussed the matter with OpenAI's General Counsel is also denied by OpenAI, which says no such conversation took place.
The mix‑up
The core of the dispute involves two former Apple engineers, Chang Liu and Tang Tan. Apple accuses Liu of accessing confidential files after his last day on January 22, 2026. OpenAI published the iMessage thread that shows Apple employees asking Liu to help locate files for ongoing projects. In the messages, Liu agrees to copy a 64 GB drive, mentions "200 ish" as a target size, and later offers to keep his iCloud connected for further transfers (OpenAI, 2026). Liu even says he will "log everything out" and stop looking at anything else when asked to sign off.
Apple's narrative frames Liu's actions as "residual access" that enabled theft. OpenAI points out that Apple's own staff asked Liu to move the data, a practice Apple acknowledges is common when staff leave. The problem, OpenAI argues, is Apple's handling of system permissions rather than Liu's conduct.
Residual‑access issue
Apple's brief mentions "residual access" as a technical problem. OpenAI adds that Apple has a history of failing to revoke system permissions promptly, which can leave former employees with unintended access to corporate files. The iMessage excerpts show Apple staff requesting Liu to copy shared folders and personal notes, blurring the line between corporate and personal data. This suggests the issue is systemic.
OpenAI's response
OpenAI filed a motion to dismiss the case (August 6, 2026 update) and an opposition to Apple's request for a preliminary injunction (September 1, 2026 update). The company says it does not possess Apple's trade secrets and is focused on building its own products (OpenAI, 2026). OpenAI also offered to work with Apple to resolve the issue before the lawsuit was filed, but Apple proceeded anyway.
The blog notes that Apple's request for an injunction is "based on false information and completely unnecessary." OpenAI's legal filings argue that an injunction would do nothing to protect any real secrets because none were taken.
What this means
The case highlights two risks for tech firms. First, sloppy internal processes can create legal exposure. If Apple's own staff are asking ex‑employees to move files, the company is effectively inviting the very behavior it later condemns. Second, the lawsuit shows how quickly a dispute can turn into a public spectacle when high‑profile names are involved.
The evidence consists mainly of internal iMessage exchanges that OpenAI released publicly. Those messages are not secret; they were shared to refute Apple's claims. The pattern suggests that Apple's legal team built a narrative that does not match the documented interactions, making the lawsuit feel more like a pressure tactic than a genuine protection of trade secrets.
Nobody knows how the courts will rule. If Apple can prove that confidential data left its walls, the case could set a precedent for how companies manage off‑boarding. If the court sees the messages as evidence of Apple's own mishandling, the lawsuit may fizzle out, leaving both sides to pick up the legal bill.
Sources