GoKawiilJudge Mark Pittman today rejected OpenAI’s request to obtain X and SpaceXAI’s confidential settlement agreement with Apple in their ongoing antitrust case. Here are the details.
Judge says terms aren’t relevant to the remaining case against OpenAI
A few days ago, X and SpaceXAI informed the federal court overseeing their antitrust lawsuit against Apple and OpenAI that, after reaching an agreement with Apple, they would move to dismiss their claims against the iPhone maker.
In the lawsuit, Elon Musk’s companies accused Apple and OpenAI of colluding to shut competing AI apps out of the market, including by preventing them from gaining visibility on the App Store, allegations both companies denied.
After X and SpaceXAI informed the court of the agreement, OpenAI filed an emergency motion asking the judge to compel them to produce its terms, arguing that they could contain information relevant to its defense as the lawsuit continues solely against OpenAI.
Judge Pittman then ordered X and SpaceXAI to submit the agreement privately to the court so he could assess whether it contained information relevant to the remaining case against OpenAI.
Today, he issued his decision, saying that after reviewing the agreement, he found that it does “not present information relevant to the issues” at hand.
From the decision:
The Court hesitates to compel the production of confidential settlement agreements entered by parties. […] Courts have, at times, permitted the production of confidential settlement agreements to the extent they contain information relevant to specific issues at summary judgment or trial. Having conducted an in camera review of the requested materials, however, the Court finds that they do not present information relevant to the issues to be decided at summary judgment or trial in this case.
In his decision, Judge Pittman also notes that OpenAI plans to file a motion for summary judgment (meaning it will ask the court to rule on the case or some of its claims without a trial), and that the court has granted the company additional time to prepare it.
... continue reading