The Apple-OpenAI Alliance is Fraying, Setting Up a Possible Legal Fight

Bloomberg reports that Apple's two-year-old partnership with OpenAI "has become strained, according to people familiar with the matter."

Bloomberg describes OpenAI as "failing to see the expected benefits from the deal and now preparing possible legal action." OpenAI lawyers are actively working with an outside legal firm on a range of options that could be formally executed in the near future, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the deliberations are private. That could include sending the iPhone maker a notice alleging breach of contract without necessarily filing a full lawsuit at the outset, according to the people... OpenAI believed that the companies' partnership, which wove ChatGPT into Apple software, would coax more users into subscribing to the chatbot. It also expected deeper integration across more Apple apps and prime placement within the Siri assistant. Instead, Apple's use of OpenAI technology across its operating systems remains limited, and features can be hard to find...

Apple has had its own concerns about OpenAI, including whether the company does enough to protect user privacy. And a recent push [by OpenAI] to make devices — an effort overseen by former Apple executives — has rankled the iPhone maker.

Any legal move by OpenAI likely wouldn't come until after the conclusion of the Musk trial, according to the people. No final decisions have been made, and OpenAI still hopes to resolve its issues with Apple outside of court.
The article points out that OpenAI "initially believed the deal could generate billions of dollars per year in subscriptions — something that hasn't come close to happening." An OpenAI executive argues to Bloomberg that from a product perspective Apple hasn't done everything they could, "and worse, they haven't even made an honest effort."

AI has limited uses for consumers

[FudRucker]

AI would make a good search engine tool for general purpose inquiring, maybe incorporate it into Safari, but most search engines have it now and ddg does a nice job of it,

necessity is the mother of invention so there has to be an actual need for something before a tool gets invented for it, so inventing good tools is not like pulling a rabbit out of a hat

Contractual promises or not?

[Mspangler]

"OpenAI believed that the companies' partnership, which wove ChatGPT into Apple software, would coax more users into subscribing to the chatbot."

I really doubt Apple promised that X% of Apple customers would subscribe to ChatGPT by Y date.

I suppose that they could sure Apple for completely bungling the AI rollout, but suing a corporation for incompetence seems unlikely to succeed.

Does ChatGPT plan to sue users who choose to not update to an AI capable OS or AI capable hardware? Then I might have to worry.

S

Re:Contractual promises or not?

[Mspangler]

Ironically I asked Googles AI and it said;

In the United States, you generally cannot sue someone for "general incompetence" alone. To win a lawsuit, you must prove the individual had a legal duty of care to you, breached that duty (which translates to professional negligence), and caused actual, measurable damages.

So if the contract did not promise that X% of Apple customers would subscribe to ChatGPT by Y date I think the lawsuit is doomed.

Apple could point a decade of consistent bungling with Siri as evidence that ChatGPT should have known better. Companies not doing their due diligence results in judges saying the legal equivalent of "sucks to be you, now go away".

For the record I have an iPad deliberately chosen because it is incapable of running AI.

Re:

[newbie_fantod]

For the record I have an iPad deliberately chosen because it is incapable of running AI.

And one reason for Apple's poor performance with implementing AI may be that it's a feature many of it's users do not want.

Apple? Screwing over a partner?

[_xeno_]

Wow, Apple, screwing over a partner? Who ever could have seen this coming?

I don't understand why anyone would ever partner on Apple on anything. They are notorious for screwing over their partners at this point. There's even a term for it, "Sherlocking." People seem to have forgotten that Apple's "privacy" stance originated as Steve Jobs not wanting to share any of the data "Apple owned" with anyone else.

Re:

[sethmeisterg]

Can't believe your post got +3, but that's because Reddit hates Apple for breathing. Apple didn't screw over OpenAI. OpenAI had "beliefs" that didn't coincide with reality.

Re: Apple? Screwing over a partner?

[Luthair]

Oh, so you're party to the terms of their contract then? While we don't know anything about the terms here, we've seen Apple rip off pulseox, and others so your fanboisim hardly has a basis in reality. Companies aren't your friend, don't have loyalty to something whose only purpose is to make the most money possible.

Survival of the fittest

[ZipNada]

There was a time when OpenAI appeared to be ascendant. So far ahead of everyone that they were almost a sure bet. That's much less obvious at this point.

Apple realizes that it would be foolish to hook themselves up exclusively to one vendor. There are loads of models and agent frameworks out there. Many of them are very good, and well up into the competitive rankings. These days your prompts pre-screened by an agent that sends each one to the most appropriate other agent that's most economical and capable o

Re:

[tlhIngan]

And likely to avoid EU oversight as well - remember the EU just ruled that Android must be open against other AI than Gemini. It's possible Apple saw the writing on the wall and wanted to limit what ChatGPT had access to, as well as make a cleaner way to integrate Claude and Gemini into the system as well.

It's also possible that Apple saw what ChatGPT could go and also wanted to ensure that nothing bad happened without user consent. Agentic AIs are routinely pushing into production and breaking stuff. It's

"they haven't even made an honest effort"

[Bob_Who]

Go ahead.....just take a bite of the Apple.

OpenAI = greed + not trustworthy

[bsdetector101]

Think that sums it up. I don't trust any AI, where are the safeguards ? Just greedy people pushing it !

Do tell.

[guygo]

OpenAI "initially believed the deal could generate billions of dollars per year in subscriptions — something that hasn't come close to happening."
Gee... who would've thought...

Throwing Lawyers...

[John Allsup]

It's like two cats with a bunch of toy mice. Can anybody who's professional training is in law have any clue at all about what AI actually is? I'm just going to grab some popcorn, if I have any left.