Apple Sues OpenAI Over Alleged Trade Secret Theft by Ex-Apple Engineers

Apple has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and IO Products, the hardware startup founded by designer Jony Ive that OpenAI acquired in 2025, alleging that former Apple engineers stole confidential hardware secrets to benefit OpenAI's device ambitions. The complaint names two individuals: Tang Tan, OpenAI's chief hardware officer, and Chang Liu, who left Apple for OpenAI in January. Apple describes the alleged conduct as a deliberate pattern of trade secret theft, not a one-off incident.

What happened

Detail	Fact
Plaintiff	Apple
Defendants	OpenAI, IO Products, Tang Tan, Chang Liu
Allegation	Pattern of trade secret theft by former Apple engineers
IO Products acquired by OpenAI	2025
Chang Liu joined OpenAI from Apple	January (year not specified in source)
Tang Tan’s current role	Chief hardware officer at OpenAI

Apple filed suit against OpenAI, its hardware-focused subsidiary IO Products, and two named individuals who previously worked at Apple. The central claim is that these engineers carried Apple’s proprietary hardware knowledge with them when they moved to OpenAI, and used it to push forward OpenAI’s own device development efforts.

IO Products was founded by Jony Ive, the designer best known for shaping Apple’s product aesthetic across iPhone, iMac, and other hardware lines. OpenAI bought the startup in 2025, signalling a serious push beyond software into physical consumer devices. Apple’s lawsuit suggests that acquisition may have been partly built on information that never belonged to OpenAI.

Who is named and why does it matter?

Tang Tan holds the title of chief hardware officer at OpenAI, a senior role that would put him at the centre of any hardware strategy the company pursues. Chang Liu joined OpenAI from Apple in January, a recent enough departure to make any alleged information transfer highly relevant to Apple’s current product pipeline.

Naming individuals alongside the company is significant. It signals that Apple’s legal team believes it can show specific acts tied to specific people, not just a vague corporate claim. Trade secret cases that name individuals tend to pursue evidence of deliberate transfer rather than generalised knowledge a former employee happens to carry.

Apple’s spokesperson statement, shared with 9to5Mac, referenced teams “constantly developing breakthrough technologies,” framing the alleged theft as an attack on active, ongoing work rather than legacy IP.

Why it matters for OpenAI’s hardware plans

OpenAI has been transparent about wanting to build hardware. The acquisition of IO Products was a clear statement of intent, and having a chief hardware officer with deep Apple experience is exactly the kind of hire that move requires. This lawsuit puts a legal cloud over that entire effort.

If Apple can show that OpenAI’s hardware roadmap was shaped by stolen proprietary information, the consequences could include injunctions that delay or block specific product work, not just financial damages. For a company still burning cash and trying to expand beyond API access and subscription software, a hardware setback of that scale would hurt.

This case is also worth watching for anyone building AI-powered products. It is a reminder that the line between “knowledge an employee has” and “trade secrets an employer owns” is heavily litigated, especially in Silicon Valley. If you are hiring engineers from competitors for their domain expertise, this case outlines the legal exposure that creates. Our own AI integration work often involves sensitive client data and system knowledge, and the same principle applies: document what is proprietary and what is general skill.

Our take

The framing of “a pattern of theft” is deliberate legal language. Apple is not claiming a single slip. It is describing something systematic, which suggests it has documentation of multiple incidents or transfers rather than one disputed conversation. That is a harder case for OpenAI to dismiss quietly.

OpenAI’s hardware ambitions have always looked ambitious on paper. Hiring Jony Ive’s team, acquiring IO Products, appointing a chief hardware officer: all of that makes more sense if you have people who already know how Apple builds things. That is also exactly what makes this lawsuit plausible.

Worth noting: the source text is partial, so some case details are not yet public. Watch for OpenAI’s formal response, which will tell you a lot about how defensible their hiring process actually was. As we covered when Fidji Simo exited OpenAI’s leadership, the company’s internal structure is under more scrutiny than ever right now.

What to do about it

1. Review your own onboarding process: ask new hires to confirm in writing that they are not bringing confidential materials from a previous employer.
2. Audit any proprietary documentation that contractors or departing employees had access to in the last 12 months.
3. If you are hiring for AI or hardware roles specifically, speak to a lawyer about IP assignment clauses before the first day of work.
4. Watch this case for rulings on what counts as a trade secret in an AI context. It may set precedents that affect how all tech companies handle engineer mobility.

The practical takeaway: a non-disclosure agreement alone does not protect you. The legal risk lives in what people carry in their heads and what they build next.

Source: The Verge · AI