Apple Vs. OpenAI

Plus: Paramount reportedly mulling exit from state as California sues over merger, Satya posts "The Reverse Information Paradox" essay, researchers and economists sign AI warning letter

Brandon Gorrell

Jul 13, 2026

Happy Monday.

We’re live on YouTube and 𝕏.

The current things in tech and business is Apple suing OpenAI, accusing the company of trade secret theft.

Today’s Lineup

776 Founder & General Partner Alexis Ohanian at 11:30 AM
Author & Collab Fund Partner Morgan Housel at 12:00 PM
Bloomberg Managing Editor Mark Gurman at 12:45 PM
Fundamental Research Labs Co-Founder & CPO Nico Christie at 1:15 PM
Microsoft Excel World Champion Michael Jarman at 1:15 PM

Run of Show

Apple Vs. OpenAI

Friday afternoon, Mark Gurman broke the news that Apple is suing OpenAI, accusing it of stealing Apple’s trade secrets. From Mark’s story in Bloomberg:

Apple Inc. sued OpenAI for trade secret theft, accusing the artificial intelligence startup and its hardware chief of engaging in a coordinated campaign to steal information about upcoming products.
The iPhone maker said in a suit Friday that OpenAI encouraged Apple employees to share information, components, drawings and other materials related to upcoming products — part of efforts by the AI company to develop its own suite of devices.

We’re having Mark on to discuss Apple’s case against OpenAI today at 12:45 PT.

At the center of the lawsuit is a former Apple employee named Chang Liu, who left for OpenAI and allegedly kept his Apple laptop for weeks after he left the company, downloaded proprietary Apple files, and encouraged other Apple employees to do the same.

Apple’s filing also spends quite a few words on the fact that OpenAI has poached more than 400 employees from the company in recent years. Tang Tan left Apple in 2024 to cofound the AI hardware startup io with Jony Ive, which OpenAI acquired in 2025 as part of its consumer AI device effort. Tan is now OpenAI’s chief hardware officer, and he’s leading the consumer device effort there. In its lawsuit, Apple says Tan systematically solicited sensitive information from Apple employees who were interviewing for roles at OpenAI.

A lot of perspectives on this flying around the timeline, but Ben Thompson and Rolfe Winkler both had interesting angles here. Winkler sees Apple’s allegations against OpenAI as part of its long history of accusing rival companies of stealing its trade secrets and technology, and doesn’t think it’s coincidental that the lawsuit is coming right as OpenAI threatens to upend Apple’s dominance in consumer hardware with its own family of products. From his piece in the WSJ:

Apple’s innovation engine failed to develop hit AI products and features, leaving it vulnerable to new entrants. Its suit could be an attempt to throw sand in the gears at OpenAI, company observers say, to slow poaching of Apple staffers, for instance.
Friday’s lawsuit has echoes of the ones Apple filed against various Android ecosystem players beginning in 2010, a legal battle royal with hardware makers producing rival phones that played out over eight years.
The central allegation then as now was that a rival stole Apple’s innovations. Apple said Samsung “slavishly copied” the iPhone with smartphones it was already selling by the millions, which Samsung denied. The companies settled in 2018 after a long, costly battle.

Ben Thompson observed the irony that Apple — two years behind on AI — is accusing OpenAI of stealing its trade secrets to build a family of frontier-level consumer AI devices. He also pointed out that Apple’s seeming definition of “trade secrets” encompasses employees themselves, the way Apple’s filing is written. He wrote in Stratechery:

Apple’s trade secret claims in this case are impossibly broad; should this ever go to trial, narrowly defining what is and is not a trade secret will be a major point of contention. As it stands Apple is basically saying that any Apple employee at OpenAI is a walking trade secret, and, well, that’s why OpenAI hired them! From where else would OpenAI hire the personnel necessary to build a consumer electronics company?

However you slice it, Apple’s move here is at least in part an attempt to slow down OpenAI’s hardware efforts, as well as a tacit acknowledgement that AI devices done well could be a serious threat to Apple’s two decades of dominance in consumer hardware. We’ll be discussing all this on the show today.

Clip Spotlight: Phiagate, explained in horse terms

You go from HorseReviews dotcom over to ClydesdalesDirect dotcom. You have Phia installed as an extension. You buy a stunning Clydesdale from the website using its online shopping features, knowing that this particular horse breed — large and powerful, with an arched neck, high withers, and a sloped shoulder — is perfect for your use case after HorseReviews educated you on all this.

You don't notice anything, but Phia was part of the transaction. It inserted an attribution code into the transaction process without you knowing, allowing it to collect the commission ClydesdalesDirect pays out to businesses that refer customers to them and effectively stealing that commission from HorseReviews dotcom, which actually referred you.

HorseReviews dotcom likely paid Google to advertise its site so that ultimately they could collect this commission. Phia did nothing but replace HorseReviews' affiliate code with its own.

That's basically what the Bloomberg story alleges.