← Back to feed

Apple has sent legal letters to dozens of current OpenAI employees who previously worked at Apple, escalating its trade secret dispute well beyond the two executives named in the original lawsuit. The FT reported the action; The Verge and Business Insider confirmed it with sourcing indicating Apple has identified “a pattern of theft of Apple’s trade secrets by OpenAI employees who were formerly at Apple.”

The original suit, filed against OpenAI and io Products, named Tang Tan, OpenAI’s Vice President of Technology, and Chang Liu, both former Apple hardware engineering leads. The new letter campaign extends the legal pressure to a significantly larger cohort — dozens of employees Apple says departed with confidential materials.

From Lawsuit to Letter Campaign

The distinction between the original complaint and this action matters. Filing suit names defendants publicly and requires formal court process. Legal letters — typically cease-and-desist or demand letters — are a separate instrument. They notify individuals of specific allegations without immediately initiating proceedings against them, but they create a paper trail for future litigation and put recipients on notice that Apple is tracking specific people.

The scale is notable. Dozens of recipients across a single company suggests Apple’s investigation extended far beyond the two executives already named. That either reflects a broader recruitment pipeline from Apple to OpenAI or a systematic review of what former employees brought with them when they changed employers.

The Pattern Allegation

Apple’s characterisation of “a pattern of theft” is the key legal construct. A single instance of an employee taking materials is a straightforward trade secret claim. A “pattern” allegation signals Apple is building toward a larger argument — potentially that OpenAI’s recruiting process was itself designed to acquire Apple’s confidential technical knowledge, not just that individual employees acted improperly.

That framing, if sustained in litigation, would shift liability upward from individuals to the organisation itself and could expose OpenAI to far larger damages than the original suit implies.

The Recruiting Backdrop

OpenAI has run one of the most aggressive technical recruiting campaigns in tech history over the past 18 months, pulling talent from Apple’s hardware, silicon, and device AI divisions at significant scale. Apple’s legal action is partly a warning shot to that pipeline — signalling that the cost of recruiting former Apple engineers may include sustained legal exposure.

The timing is also relevant. OpenAI’s hardware ambitions — anchored by io Products and the device program — depend heavily on people who built Apple’s chip and device ecosystem. Apple’s lawsuit targets precisely that knowledge base.

What Comes Next

Legal letters do not automatically become lawsuits. Recipients typically have a response window — often 30 days — to negotiate, comply, or dispute the allegations. The outcome determines whether Apple files additional proceedings or considers the matter resolved. Given the pattern allegation and the scale of the campaign, a negotiated resolution covering the full cohort seems more likely than dozens of individual lawsuits, though Apple has shown no reluctance to litigate so far.

OpenAI has not publicly responded to the letter campaign.