Tag: Legal

Apple Sues OpenAI Alleging Theft Of Trade Secrets

No honor among partners or thieves.

In the middle of the Artificial Intelligence wars, which has included quite a bit of employee shuffling between AI hungry tech companies seeking to gain an edge, it seems someone might not have been all that intelligent when it comes to sharing things they knew at the company they’re leaving with the company they’re interviewing for.

Apple logo2.jpg.

Apple today dropped a lawsuit against OpenAI alleging that ChatGPT maker and some of Apple’s ex-employees stole trade secrets. 9to5Mac has the fullest report I’ve seen on this so far, including this statement from Apple:

At Apple, our teams are constantly developing breakthrough technologies to create the best products and services in the world, and protecting their work and intellectual property is something we take very seriously. Recently, significant evidence has emerged suggesting individuals employed by OpenAI wrongfully took Apple’s secret and confidential information regarding our unreleased technologies, processes, and products. We will always defend our teams’ hard work and innovations, and we are taking all appropriate steps to do so.

The full filing can be read here. The details are quite interesting if you’re into this kind of corporate skullduggery and legal maneuvering.

Here’s a quote from the filing:

In the months before he left Apple, Mr. Tan met with OpenAI or its collaborators and discussed meetings with a key Apple supplier. He began emailing himself information about Apple’s suppliers and internal summaries of the consumer electronics industry. And today, when interviewing Apple employees for jobs at OpenAI, Mr. Tan uses Apple’s confidential information to gain access to even more insider knowledge. He has used an Apple internal project codename to ask, “What’s theplan[?]” for an unannounced Apple product.

He has directed job candidates still working for Apple to bring “Actual parts” from Apple to their interviews for “show and tell” sessions in which he and his team at OpenAI can elicit still more Apple confidential information. These directions to bring Apple’s parts to OpenAI job interviews surprised at least one of the candidates, who commented that he “didn’t even know we could take those from the office.”

This will certainly further strain on Apple’s partnership with OpenAI. Word had circulated earlier this past Spring that OpenAI was going to be the first company to release legal beagles at Apple over dissatisfaction with the partnership.

I’ll say this, even though everything is alleged at this point, Apple has to be pretty pissed off to drop this lawsuit. Of course if the accusations are true who could blame them. It’s certainly a shot across the bow if not directly at the water line.

But then again, when it comes to companies like OpenAI (also Apple and others) that had no compunction about scrapping the entire Internet to train their AI robots on the intellectual property of others, nobody should be trusting anybody with anything in these corporate circles.

The one thing this era has reminded us is that there’s no honor among thieves and not much that any company or government says that can be trusted.

I wonder if anyone has run the legal filing through OpenAI’s just announced products for a legal analysis yet?

Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.

The Bad Guys Love The Law When It Is On Their Side

You only think you own what you bought.

I once wrote a line in a play that I cribbed from my mother that always got applause, “Just because it’s legal, don’t make it right.” I’d like to assume that most folks who might read a thing or two here understand that far too many laws have been written not to protect everyone or make things right, but instead to often give cover for blatant acts against the little guy in favor of the big guns. 

Copyright laws when used as a weapon to further corporate interests and feather CEO nests have been one of the  favorite tools for the bad guys. That’s been an ever increasing problem paralleling the advance of technology as more and more companies reject the idea that if you bought it you own it, and still claim rights that too often are protected by laws that were never written to contemplate the world we find ourselves in. 

With a hat tip to Denny Henke, take a look at this video from Louis Rossmann about a recent example of this. 

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. 

There’s No Happy Endings For This Trump Fairy Tale

Yowsa did the howls go up! Trump’s bond in the civil fraud case got reduced on appeal from $454 million to $175 million and he got a ten-day stay before he has to cough up the dough. If the intital judgment had been for $175 million instead of $454 million I’d bet we see this differently today if that  amount had been upheld. But that’s fiction. In a werid Sartre-esque reality show of our own making. And it shouldn’t be surprising.

That’s how screwed up we’ve allowed this sad excuse of a man to warp most of the world around us. On every conceivable level. We can continue to pretend the institutions we’ve relied on will offer some protections from the likes of this decaying orange turd and someday after he’s gone the world returns to a better place. But he’s crushed any hopes of that. At least for a few generations. Besides it’s a fiction he’s exposed, not one he’s created. Most fairy tales don’t end with happily ever after.

Yes, this vedict is a lifeline. Yes, it seems like he’s getting a break. And you know what? He is. And he will continue to get them. He might one day be held accountable for all of this, but I’m betting not whle he’s still breathing. Life ain’t fair damnit, especially when you’re trying to play by the rules and the other side doesn’t give fuck all about rules.

One of these days we’ll learn that. It will be messy. But at least it’ll be more honest.

Meanwhile: The judge in the porn star hush money case that trial will begin jury selection on April 15th. And so it goes.

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome.

Supreme Betrayal Is a Must Read

At times it feels like we’re uncontrollably tumbling downhill in our attempts to stave off the end of our American Experiment. At every pause in the tumble or reach for an anchor to stop our descent, it seems like more and more ground gives way threatening to bury us all if we ever reach a bottom. 

If we somehow survive what’s ahead of us and historians are able to do what historians have historically done, this article, Supreme Betrayal, by J. Michael Lutting and Laurence Tribe, will be an excellent chronicle of what just happened when the Supreme Court of the United States helped the often shaky, but always resilent foundation of our democracy slip its moorings like many of the other fabled institutions we used to rely on. 

I strongly encourage you read the entire piece but this excerpt is both damning and telling:

What ought to have been, as a matter of the Constitution’s design and purpose, the climax of the struggle for the survival of America’s democracy and the rule of law instead turned out to be its nadir, delivered by a Court unwilling to perform its duty to interpret the Constitution as written.

It’s much too late in the game for this to have any impact in the current election. That decision has been rendered. Let’s hope it’s not to late for the historians who will need to understand what this moment means long after most of us are gone to consider this in their chronicles. If they’re allowed to.

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome.

Tampering With Words

This cracks me up. The NFL is investigating whether or not there was tampering between its teams and potential free agents. Of course this tampering comes outside of the officially condoned “Legal Tampering Window” the NFL allows prior to free agents being able to sign with other teams.

The Oxford dictionary defines “tampering” this way:

1. Interfere with (something) in order to cause damage or make unauthorized alterations.

2. Exert a secret or corrupt influence upon (someone).

Sounds bad. I’m not sure prefacing it with the word “legal” softens it as much as some lawyers thought it would.

My reaction isn’t about the monkeyshines that happens when players and teams are trying to one up each other. That would be akin to being shocked if there was gambling going on in a casino or in NFL locker rooms. All’s fair in love and war and apparently in billion dollar businesses that can tamper with language in ways that only a lawyer can love.

Just who do they think they’re fooling?

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome.