Apple files lawsuit accusing ChatGPT maker OpenAI of stealing trade secrets - Netscape News ⁠39%

7/11/2026, 8:38:50 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Negativity Bias, and Framing Effect, with Self-Serving Bias as the most egregious example at 18% saturation with 147 hits. Analysis detected 1,439 faulty-reasoning hits from 815 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 44.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠39% (13,378 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 61.10% of the article peer group.

Apple on Friday accused OpenAI of stealing trade secrets as it seeks to build its own hardware for ChatGPT, a major rupture in a partnership between the iPhone maker and the artificial intelligence company. 
Apple said in the lawsuit filed in a California federal court that OpenAI encouraged Apple employees it was recruiting to share confidential information, even guiding how to avoid scrutiny when taking jobs at the other company. 
“This case is about Apple’s former employees stealing Apple’s trade secrets for the benefit of OpenAI,” the filing says. 
“Apple brings this suit to put a stop to it.” 
Two former Apple employees who now work for OpenAI are also named as defendants. 
One is Tang Tan, who helped design the iPhone, Apple Watch and iPod and is now OpenAI’s chief hardware officer. 
The other is Chang Liu, a former electrical engineer Apple says it entrusted with some of its most sensitive product development efforts before Liu left Apple to join OpenAI earlier this year. 
OpenAI said it is still reviewing the filing, but spokesperson Drew Pusateri said in a statement Friday that OpenAI has “no interest in other companies’ trade secrets. 
We remain focused on building innovative technology that empowers people everywhere.” 
OpenAI has never said exactly what type of device it is building, but has described it as an effort to find a new way to interact with AI that goes beyond “traditional products and interfaces.” 
It’s part of a broader push to create a physical embodiment of the latest AI advances, a decade after Amazon and Google introduced screen-free talking speakers into homes. 
The lawsuit claims the effort was built partly on knowledge stolen from Apple. 
“OpenAI’s nascent hardware business now rests on the shakiest of foundations, rotten to its core by its illegal reliance on misappropriated trade secrets,” the lawsuit says. 
Apple said it began investigating whether some of its confidential information was compromised and “uncovered a pattern of theft” of Apple’s trade secrets by former employees who moved on to positions at OpenAI. 
The lawsuit alleges both Liu and Tan accessed Apple’s confidential company information and files while working at OpenAI. 
Among the allegations, Apple claims Liu accessed and downloaded several confidential hardware-related files on an Apple-issued device he kept after departing. 
It also alleges Tan directed job candidates who were still working for Apple to bring “Actual parts” from Apple to their interviews at OpenAI. 
Apple said in the lawsuit that it reached out to OpenAI in February to raise its concerns early in its investigation, but said that OpenAI did not respond. 
An Apple spokesperson said in a statement Friday that the company will “always defend our teams’ hard work and innovations, and we are taking all appropriate steps to do so.” 
Apple sought help from OpenAI several years ago as it was behind in the AI race sparked by ChatGPT’s arrival. 
The two companies partnered in 2024 to use ChatGPT as an AI-powered “answer engine” on the iPhone when the built-in Siri technology couldn’t satisfy user needs. 
More recently, the partnership has veered toward rivalry. 
As part of its expansion efforts, OpenAI recruited former Apple designer Jony Ive to oversee a project to build an AI-powered device that many analysts believe could eventually challenge Apple’s products. 
Last year, OpenAI announced it was working on a secret hardware collaboration with Ive to pioneer a new way of communicating with artificial intelligence. 
As part of the collaboration, OpenAI acquired io Products, a product and engineering company co-founded by Ive, Tan and two others, in a deal valued at nearly $6.5 billion. 
That led a little-known tech startup iyO Inc. to sue Ive and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman for trademark infringement due to the similar-sounding name and the firms’ past interactions. 
The startup also sued one of its own former employees for allegedly leaking a confidential drawing of iyO’s unreleased product, and it later added trade secret theft claims against Tan to the lawsuit. 
Apple’s lawsuit also names io Products as a defendant. 
Lawyers who previously represented the firm and Tan referred The Associated Press to OpenAI for comment. 
Apple’s lawsuit comes as OpenAI has been exploring whether to go public on Wall Street and faces heightened competition from rivals including Anthropic and Google. 
OpenAI winnowed down some of its business ventures earlier this year to focus on its core product, ChatGPT, but has continued to pursue a device, the company’s chief financial officer told The Associated Press this spring. 
“We have consumer hardware that will come towards the end of this year,” CFO Sarah Friar told the AP in April. 
07/10/2026 20:22 -0400 
© Copyright The Associated Press. 
All rights reserved. 
The information contained in this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.7%Associated Press: 4.0%Confirmation Bias9.7%This article: 4.4%Associated Press: 1.2%Anchoring Bias4.4%This article: 5.5%Associated Press: 1.8%Availability Heuristic5.5%This article: 7.2%Associated Press: 1.3%Representativeness Heuristic7.2%This article: 2.5%Associated Press: 0.3%Hindsight Bias2.5%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.8%Associated Press: 8.1%Framing Effect10.8%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.9%Associated Press: 1.2%Optimism Bias6.9%This article: 3.3%Associated Press: 2.1%Pessimism Bias3.3%This article: 12.0%Associated Press: 8.1%Negativity Bias12.0%This article: 18.0%Associated Press: 4.5%Self-Serving Bias18.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 3.4%Associated Press: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%Associated Press: 1.3%Halo Effect3.8%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.5%Associated Press: 1.1%Recency Bias6.5%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 8.2%Associated Press: 2.0%Appeal to Authority8.2%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.5%Associated Press: 1.8%Hasty Generalization8.5%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.2%Associated Press: 3.6%Appeal to Emotion8.2%This article: 7.2%Associated Press: 1.6%Begging the Question7.2%This article: 16.6%Associated Press: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)16.6%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.5%Associated Press: 0.8%Burden of Proof5.5%This article: 3.7%Associated Press: 0.2%Appeal to Nature3.7%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.9%Associated Press: 0.3%Anecdotal2.9%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.2%Associated Press: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.2%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.6%Associated Press: 2.1%Unattributed Quote3.6%This article: 5.5%Associated Press: 1.6%Quote-first Misdirection5.5%This article: 1.7%Associated Press: 2.7%Biased Writer Voice1.7%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Associated Press: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.6%

815 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers25%attributed speech608writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageApple • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageDrew Pusateri • 27 words • 0.0% coverageDrew Pusateri • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageApple • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageApple • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageApple • 28 words • 0.0% coverageApple • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Friar • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Apple

100%flagged-word coverage
148 attributed words71% of attributed speech81% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Quote-first Misdirection-7.4 ptsWriter: 7.4%Apple: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-4.8 ptsWriter: 4.8%Apple: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.3 ptsWriter: 2.3%Apple: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.