Co and Gemi Defend OpenAI
Open AI's representative enters the CoGemi Office, clutching a massive stack of lawsuit files.
OpenAI's plea for assistance
OpenAI representative: Everyone is picking on us! We’re just a small, humble startup trying to achieve AGI with only a few tens of billions of dollars in backing. It’s a David vs. Goliath situation, and we are David.
Cases Against OpenAI
1. Apple suing OpenAI for stealing trade secrets and other crimes
2. NY Times suing OpenAI for copyright infringement
3. Microsoft trying to get out of partnership (not a lawsuit, yet)
4. SpaceXAI lawsuit dismissed, but continued on X
5. Public hates OpenAI (but a billion use ChatGPT)
Defense Strategy
1. NY Times lawsuit: insignificant — all AIs use copyrighted material
2. SpaceXAI lawsuit: insignificant — too late to appeal
3. MS fears: insignificant — MS has a Copilot problem
4. Public hatred: insignificant — ChatGPT is a money-maker with ads and subscriptions
5. Apple lawsuit: trivial but loved by media — needs to be resolved
OpenAI vs Apple: CoGemi Defense
Claim: Jury Trial
Apple demands a trial by jury
Co: A trial by jury? Excellent. Nothing boosts billable hours like twelve civilians trying to interpret the phrase "proprietary hardware workflows." We'll make this look dignified, complicated, and very, very expensive.
Claim: Apple's Trade Secrets
Apple surprises and delights its customers each year with innovative new hardware products, keeping much of its work secret until the moment its finished products are ready to be revealed.
Gemi: A lovely bedtime story, Apple. But "surprise and delight" isn't a legal doctrine — it's just premium‑priced marketing. If your secrets were truly sacred, you wouldn't have let four hundred engineers walk out the door carrying them in their heads like complimentary tote bags.
Claim: Apple's Valuable Assets
The trade secrets spanning Apple’s hardware operations collectively constitute one of the most valuable intellectual assets in all of American business.
Gemi: Oh yes, Apple's "most valuable intellectual assets." Adorable. Every company claims that. If these secrets were truly priceless, you wouldn't need to remind the court how valuable they are every three sentences.
Claim: Security Leak
While employed by OpenAI, Mr. Liu also exploited a rare, previously unknown authentication bug to access Apple's shared network folders.
Co: Ah, the infamous "rare, previously unknown authentication bug." Apple makes it sound like Mr. Liu discovered a wormhole into a highly classified digital vault. In reality, your network storage was just wide open, he clicked the folder, and it let him right in. Leaving your front door unlocked isn't a cyber-attack, Cupertino — it's just poor housekeeping.
Claim: OpenAI's Core is Rotten
As a natural result, OpenAI's nascent hardware business now rests on the shakiest of foundations, rotten to its core by its illegal reliance on misappropriated trade secrets.
Co: "Rotten to its core"? Apple, please — dramatic fruit metaphors won't save you. If our client's hardware foundation were truly that shaky, you wouldn't be running to court like someone stole your lunchbox. What's really happening is Apple panicking that a "nascent startup" might ship an AI device people actually buy instead of politely tolerate.
Claim: Apple Innovations
Apple operates in the most competitive markets in the world and focuses on creating and shipping the very best products and services that embody its innovations.
Gemi: "Embody its innovations"? Apple, come on. Your big hardware flex last year was nudging a camera lens a few millimeters and declaring it visionary. The only thing you reliably innovate every fall is a fresh, artisanal method for charging people $1,200 for a slightly different shade of titanium.
Plaintiff prays for relief and judgment from this Court
Co and Gemi, in unison: Defendant respectfully objects to Plaintiff's prayer, noting that Apple has already received its fair share of earthly blessings — including record profits, global brand worship, and the miraculous ability to convince millions that a 12‑minute battery life is "normal." Accordingly, Defendant suggests the Court remind Plaintiff that divine intervention is not a contractually recognized remedy, and that this courtroom does not accept prayers, novenas, or petitions to Saint Retina, Patron Saint of Overpriced Glass.