xAI Sues OpenAI for Alleged Theft of AI Secrets

Elon Musk's artificial intelligence startup, xAI, has filed a lawsuit against its competitor, OpenAI, in the federal court of California. The lawsuit alleges that OpenAI has stolen commercial secrets to gain an unfair advantage in the race to develop artificial intelligence technology.

The lawsuit, filed on Wednesday, claims that OpenAI has a "disturbing pattern of behavior" involving the poaching of former xAI employees to obtain confidential information related to xAI's AI chatbot, Grok. The lawsuit states that OpenAI specifically targets individuals who possess key technologies and business plans of xAI, including those familiar with xAI's source code and operational advantages in data center construction. OpenAI then allegedly uses illegal means to induce these employees to violate their confidentiality and other obligations to xAI.

As of Thursday, neither company had responded to requests for comment on the lawsuit. xAI discovered these alleged actions during an investigation into a former engineer, who is accused of stealing commercial secrets and bringing confidential information to OpenAI, the parent company of ChatGPT. The engineer has not yet responded to the allegations.

In addition to the lawsuit against OpenAI, xAI has also filed a separate lawsuit against Apple, alleging that the company conspired with OpenAI to suppress competing platforms. Apple has not yet responded to the lawsuit. Musk has also sued OpenAI for transforming into a for-profit company, while OpenAI has countersued Musk for harassment.

This latest lawsuit is part of a broader legal dispute between Musk and OpenAI, of which Musk is a co-founder. It also highlights the intense competition in Silicon Valley, where companies are vying for AI talent and market share in this rapidly evolving industry. According to the lawsuit, in addition to the engineer, OpenAI has also poached another former xAI engineer and an unnamed senior financial executive to obtain xAI's commercial secrets. The engineer is not a defendant in this case and could not be reached for comment.