GoKawiilApple has asked the court overseeing its lawsuit against OpenAI and other defendants to let its own experts review forensic images used in the case, while also seeking documents related to parts of OpenAI’s hardware R&D. Here are the details.
A bit of background
In early July, Apple sued former employees, OpenAI, and io Products, accusing them of trade secret misappropriation.
The lawsuit involves former Apple employees who allegedly took confidential information with them when they left the company. Apple also alleges that former employee Chang Liu coached another Apple employee on materials to review ahead of an OpenAI interview, while Tang Tan directed Apple job candidates to bring hardware components and other materials to interviews.
More recently, Apple said an initial forensic inspection of a MacBook used by Liu after leaving the company showed that he had used a confidential Apple circuit schematic to run a simulation while working at OpenAI. Apple also said the MacBook pointed to Liu’s use of a Mac mini, which the company has since sought access to as part of the case.
OpenAI has since refuted Apple’s allegations, arguing that this situation is “a mess of Apple’s own making,” since the company’s allegedly lax offboarding and security practices made it easier for employees to unintentionally retain access to confidential information after leaving.
One of the many points of contention in the case is Apple’s request for expedited discovery, which OpenAI has opposed. Another is Apple’s request for a preliminary injunction that would restrict OpenAI’s use of Apple’s alleged trade secrets while the lawsuit proceeds, potentially affecting its ongoing hardware development.
Apple argues that it needs expedited access to certain evidence precisely because OpenAI is still developing its hardware product, meaning that any alleged use of Apple’s trade secrets could become further intertwined with that work and increasingly difficult to undo.
OpenAI, in turn, argues that Apple has not shown why a separate expedited discovery process is warranted, and says that Apple’s requests are too broad.
Due to this impasse, the court asked both sides to submit a joint filing laying out their respective positions on expedited discovery. That document, filed last Friday, has now been made public.
... continue reading