Apple’s OpenAI lawsuit offers lessons about company secrets

It’s not often that big corporate battles have a direct impact on the day-to-day of the IT pro, but Apple’s conflict with OpenAI is an exception.

Apple is suing OpenAI for network breach and parts smuggling, claiming the AI company furthered its hardware production goals by stealing proprietary information. It’s a major lawsuit, and one that could derail OpenAI’s plans to introduce a device in late 2026 or early 2027—and delay its IPO.

Charge it. According to the 41-page complaint, three former Apple employees who now work for OpenAI—Chang Liu, Tang Yew Tan, and Yu-Ting “Alyssa” Peng—stole intellectual property, which was then used by OpenAI to develop an as-yet-unrevealed device. Liu and Tan are listed as defendants, but Peng is not.

In its complaint, Apple called the charges of corporate espionage “the tip of the iceberg,” and that OpenAI leadership has “normalized and exemplified” misconduct related to trade secret theft. Apple admitted it could not refer directly to everything that’s happened due to a lack of visibility into OpenAI’s internal processes.

“This much is clear, however,” the complaint claims. “At every level, from members of its Technical Staff to its Chief Hardware Officer, and in coordination with business partners, OpenAI has been stealing Apple’s trade secrets and confidential information.”

Lessons learned. For IT pros watching these two behemoths fight it out, there are lessons about how to handle valuable organizational information. Mike Wehrs, COO for TieTechnology, told IT Brew that while he wasn’t personally familiar with the Apple and OpenAI case, a good way to avoid damaging leaks of information is to ensure that staff who have access to sensitive documents and company plans are aware of their legal and ethical responsibilities.

That’s especially important when discussing corporate secrets with those outside the company, he added.

“It is up to the legal department to make sure that the people who are allowed to go and have these discussions are appropriately briefed and trained in intellectual property law, and how to handle certain discussions around disclosure,” Wehrs said.