Both sides should learn to remain silent and work the case through legal channels.
Apple is doing it right, simple high level statements.
OpenAI is acting like a teenager posting screenshots of literal texts and being overall petulant.
This is open and shut. The mature company will win this.
More to OP's points, Apple made legal filings. OpenAI is penning blog posts.
OpenAI is acting like a teenager posting screenshots of literal texts and being overall petulant.
Or you know, another perspective: Apple filed a very public lawsuit with some very explosive allegations, and OpenAI responded with receipts showing some of those allegations to be rooted in Apple's own incompetence. Sure, many more allegations are still unaddressed, but based on these screenshots a neutral observer could realistically question those too.
> This is open and shut. The mature company will win this.
This is not OpenAI's first rodeo so we actually have precedent: Elon filed a similarly explosive lawsuit, OpenAI responded similarly with receipts, and guess who won that case: https://openai.com/index/openai-elon-musk/
Apple is outright going for corporate espionage claims. They can also fall back to the CFAA and push for criminal prosecution of former employees individually.
Apple asked for expedited discovery, I guess you could say OpenAI obliged ;-)
Apple does this to most any company that ends up with any of its former employees. It's basically expected. Apple is being the bully.
But it's extremely harmful when there isn't.
"Alice says murder is bad, while Bob says murder is a fun and healthy recreational activity. Trying to see validity in each point of view is a virtue, not a vice." See, it doesn't work.
In the case of Apple and OpenAI, since that's actually what we're talking about: why is it wrong to suggest that there may be validity to each other's points of view, especially given that we don't have all the facts?
It's 2026; we can probably update "pound the table" to "pound social media"
This isn't a "both sides" situation.
OpenAI is posting drama blog posts. Apple isn't doing that.
"Apple says" in the headline here actually means: Apple filed for a preliminary injunction with the court and since that is a public record we are reporting the contents of it.
The media is happy to stoke the flames.
Why? Apple surely doesn't want to and why should they?