Narrow Discovery or Expansive Probe?
At the center of the dispute lies a broader question: how far discovery in the OpenAI X Antitrust suit should reach.
OpenAI maintained that any safety and privacy documents subject to disclosure should be limited strictly to materials actually shared with Apple during negotiations. Because Leike was not part of those talks, the company said, he is unlikely to possess relevant communications.
The company also rejected X’s assertion that by promoting privacy protections as a benefit to Apple users, it placed its entire safety track record into contention.
The privacy assurances cited in the Apple deal, OpenAI clarified, refer specifically to the architectural choice not to retain Apple users’ IP addresses. Plaintiffs, OpenAI argued, cannot transform that narrow representation into a sweeping inquiry into every internal safety discussion the company has ever had.
“Plaintiffs cannot bootstrap a statement about specific privacy protections attendant to the integration’s architecture into wide-ranging discovery,” the brief stated.
