xAI accused of destroying evidence in antitrust case against Apple and OpenAI

In a dramatic escalation of the ongoing legal battle between xAI, OpenAI, and Apple, new allegations have surfaced suggesting that Elon Musk's AI company may have systematically destroyed evidence relevant to the antitrust case. The lawsuit, which initially centered on claims of App Store collusion, has evolved into a complex web of discovery disputes and accusations of improper conduct.

The Case Takes a Dark Turn

The legal proceedings have taken a significant turn as OpenAI has accused xAI of directing employees to use ephemeral messaging tools that automatically delete texts and documents. According to court documents, OpenAI claims that xAI has "not produced a single nonpublic document concerning the substance of their allegations or that OpenAI could use in its defense."

This accusation is particularly serious because, in legal cases like this, all parties are legally obligated to preserve and hand over internal communications that may be relevant to the case during the discovery phase. Failure to do so can result in court sanctions, including penalties.

The Evidence Destruction Allegations

OpenAI's allegations are detailed and specific. The company claims that xAI has been routing "communications about every aspect of xAI's business, including matters highly relevant to this case, through these message-destruction tools." Even more damning, OpenAI suggests that xAI knew they were planning to sue and were under a legal duty to preserve evidence, yet proceeded with the destruction anyway.

The statement that "destroying evidence was the whole point" indicates the severity of the allegations and suggests a deliberate attempt to gain an unfair advantage in the litigation. OpenAI argues that this leaves them and other targets of Musk's litigation "at an inequitable disadvantage."

Court Rejects xAI's Discovery Requests

Adding to xAI's legal challenges, the court has repeatedly rejected the company's discovery requests. Most recently, the court denied xAI's attempt to include Jan Leike, OpenAI's former Head of Alignment, in the list of executives who would be compelled to provide documents for discovery.

The court found that Leike's appointment as a custodian of records was "not appropriate," noting that he "does not appear to be relevant or proportional to the needs of the case." The timing of Leike's departure from OpenAI in 2024 and his lack of involvement in the Apple AI implementation were cited as key factors in the decision.

This rejection follows a pattern of the court finding xAI's discovery requests to be disproportionate and overly broad. Just last month, South Korea rejected xAI's request for documents from the Kakao super app, and the US court previously denied xAI's request to see OpenAI's source code.

The Broader Context

The case has evolved significantly since its inception. What began as accusations of App Store collusion has transformed into a complex legal battle involving multiple jurisdictions and increasingly technical disputes. The court's repeated rejections of xAI's discovery requests suggest skepticism about the company's approach to the litigation.

Interestingly, this case echoes similar issues in other high-profile tech litigation. Just recently, Google faced criticism from US District Judge James Donato for its "deeply troubling" failure to preserve internal communications during its legal battle against Epic Games. While Google received only a verbal scolding without sanctions, the incident highlights how seriously courts take evidence preservation in tech industry litigation.

What This Means for the Case

The evidence destruction allegations could have serious implications for xAI's case. If proven, such conduct could lead to sanctions, adverse inferences by the court, or even dismissal of claims. The court has not yet ruled on OpenAI's motion regarding the evidence destruction allegations, but the seriousness of the accusations cannot be understated.

For now, the case continues to unfold with each new development adding layers of complexity. The repeated rejection of xAI's discovery requests, combined with the serious allegations of evidence destruction, suggests that Musk's company may be facing an uphill battle in proving its antitrust claims against Apple and OpenAI.

As this legal drama continues to play out, it serves as a reminder of the high stakes involved in tech industry litigation and the importance of proper legal conduct during the discovery process. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for competition in the AI and mobile app markets, making it a closely watched legal battle in the tech industry.