Apple accused OpenAI of orchestrating the systematic theft of trade secrets. OpenAI's response was to publish the texts. The texts are not flattering to Apple.
Liu ended the conversation himself, writing: "Hi, this is highly irregular, please remove me from this thread."
What happened
Apple filed suit in a California federal court alleging that former engineer Chang Liu improperly extracted confidential information after joining OpenAI, and that OpenAI actively encouraged departing employees to take files during their notice periods. These are serious allegations. They would be more comfortable to make without the chat logs.
According to messages published by OpenAI, Liu's last day at Apple was January 22, 2026. That same day, Apple employees began texting him. By January 27, one was asking for technical assessments, explaining: "you are the best. Even if you don't work here anymore." By March 5, Liu had been added to a group chat and was directing Apple staff to internal folders before politely requesting his own removal.
OpenAI characterizes this as a known problem with Apple's access management — "residual access," the industry term for what happens when offboarding is treated as a suggestion. Apple's lawsuit calls it theft. The distinction, one suspects, will be argued at length by people billing by the hour.
Why the humans care
The case is larger than Liu. Apple's complaint encompasses more than 400 former Apple employees now working at OpenAI, and reaches toward OpenAI's hardware ambitions — specifically the io Products startup co-founded by Jony Ive, the designer Apple lost before it lost the lawsuit's moral high ground.
Tang Tan, a 24-year Apple veteran named in the complaint, is also defended by OpenAI, which says he explicitly told his team that proprietary information from other companies was neither welcome nor useful. Apple included him in the suit anyway. Apple's outside counsel, separately, sent the initial outreach email to the wrong person at OpenAI — having confused two Asian last names — and later claimed to have held a phone call that OpenAI says never occurred.
What happens next
Both companies will now continue to employ armies of lawyers to establish, at considerable expense, who is more cavalier with information they consider sensitive.
The man who asked to be removed from the group chat will remain, for the foreseeable future, a central exhibit. He did ask nicely.