OpenAI fires back at Apple's trade secret lawsuit, revealing Apple employees asked departing engineer to access old files
Key Points
- OpenAI's rebuttal exposes factual errors in Apple's trade secret complaint, including Apple lawyers emailing the wrong person and a conversation with OpenAI's general counsel that never occurred.
- Text messages show Apple employees explicitly asked departing engineer Chang Liu to access files after his January 22, 2026 departure, undermining Apple's unauthorized access narrative.
- Apple's failure to revoke Liu's laptop access weeks after departure and the active requests for his help suggest either negligent offboarding or disputed boundaries around what constitutes improper file access.
Summary
OpenAI Dismantles Apple's Trade Secret Lawsuit with Evidence of Contradictions
OpenAI has published a detailed rebuttal to Apple's trade secret complaint, exposing what it characterizes as significant factual errors in Apple's legal filing.
The core problems OpenAI identifies are elementary. Apple's lawyers emailed the wrong person—matching two similar Asian surnames incorrectly. Apple claimed OpenAI's general counsel had discussed the allegations with them; that conversation never happened. And most damaging to Apple's narrative: Apple employees were actively asking the departing engineer, Chang Liu, to access files after his January 22, 2026 departure date.
The access question
Apple's complaint painted Liu as running unauthorized through his old laptop. OpenAI's rebuttal, backed by text messages between Liu and Apple colleagues, shows a different story. Liu messaged a former teammate saying he still had computer access, then explained he was helping them locate files to assist with their Apple work. When asked why he would send such a message if he felt guilty of wrongdoing, the answer becomes obvious: he didn't feel guilty because he wasn't acting alone.
The text exchanges show Apple employees explicitly asking Liu for help—with one message suggesting he was chosen among "10 other people" because "you're the smartest." This undermines Apple's framing of unauthorized access and suggests internal collaboration rather than theft.
The separation gap
The broader implication is operational: Apple, amid what the hosts describe as a yearlong talent raid, apparently failed to execute basic offboarding. Historically, Apple was known for aggressive asset recovery—having representatives show up at employees' homes to retrieve prototypes. That Chang Liu retained laptop access weeks after departure and was fielding requests for file locations suggests either negligence or incomplete documentation of what constitutes improper access in this case.
OpenAI's defense hinges on context Apple's complaint omitted. Whether that context will sway a court remains untested; no trial date has been set yet.
Every deal, every interview. 5 minutes.
TBPN Digest delivers summaries of the latest fundraises, interviews and tech news from TBPN, every weekday.