In what will be a blockbuster suit, Apple is suing OpenAI, alleging that two ex-employees, one of whom was Apple’s previous Vice President of Product Design for iPhone and Apple Watch, maintained an ongoing and successful effort in stealing intellectual property to enrich OpenAI’s development efforts.

In the suit, filed on Friday, Apple goes into some detail about what two named defendants, Chang Liu and previous Vice President of Product Design for iPhone and Apple Watch Tang Yew Tan have done to draw the company’s ire. Specifically, the suit claims that for months after leaving Apple, they stole and used Apple intellectual property to advance OpenAI’s goals.

And, OpenAI didn’t do anything about it, nor did they respond to Apple asking questions about the hires, the data, and what was being done with it.

Reportedly, Liu failed to return Apple-issued hardware, that was still authenticated to access Apple’s networks. Apple alleges that Liu told a colleague still at Apple that he was planning to access Apple information.

And in doing so, Liu exploited an authentication bug to access Apple’s shared network folders. He then bragged to his colleague that it was “so funny” that this bug existed.

That employee departed Apple in April, after pointing out to Liu that they should communicate over a different secure platform. Specifically, the pair used Line Messenger.

She was hired by OpenAI in April. She is not being sued at the moment.

The filing goes on to claim that over weeks while developing hardware for OpenAI, Liu downloaded what the filing calls “dozens” of files. Specifically:

• Information about unreleased products
• Engineering presentations
• Technical specifications
• Proprietary project data.

Apple’s internal investigations found out that Tan was doing the same after departing Apple, following a 24-year career.

The suit alleges that in the months before Tan left Apple to serve as OpenAI’s Chief Hardware Officer, Tan began emailing himself information about Apple suppliers. He also allegedly directed candidates to bring unreleased hardware components from Apple to their interviews with OpenAI to spill more information that’s more current than what Tan supplied himself.

In those interviews, OpenAI is said to instruct new hires on how to avoid scrutiny when leaving Apple. Specifically, Tan has warned potential hires to not tell Apple that they are headed to OpenAI, and stay at Apple as long as they can before onboarding.

Apple says this, because they say that Tan has sent messages to Apple-issued work devices, and shared a stolen procedural document, detailing Apple’s security policies.

During investigation, Apple said that it reached out to OpenAI to discuss what precautions the AI firm was taking to combat the leak and use of information. OpenAI reportedly did not respond to the inquiry.

While the suit claims that Apple “lacks visibility” on what’s going on, the allegations are detailed. Clearly, Apple is looking for discovery to further emphasize their points, and see how far the issue goes.

“Only OpenAI and Mr. Liu know all the ways they have been exploiting the trove of Apple confidential information he stole, and to the extent they have not concealed or destroyed the evidence of these misappropriations, it will be investigated thoroughly in discovery.”

Apple believes that this is all part of a concerted effort to take and use confidential information.

An Apple spokesperson went on the record about the suit.

“At Apple, our teams are constantly developing breakthrough technologies to create the best products and services in the world, and protecting their work and intellectual property is something we take very seriously. Recently, significant evidence has emerged suggesting individuals employed by OpenAI wrongfully took Apple’s secret and confidential information regarding our unreleased technologies, processes, and products. We will always defend our teams’ hard work and innovations, and we are taking all appropriate steps to do so.”

Apple is obviously seeking judgement, an injunction against use and possession of Apple intellectual property, a demand of a return of Apple’s property, damages, and royalties for use of Apple’s intellectual property.

The suit was filed in the US District Court, San Jose Division.