Sam Altman, the CEO at OpenAI, said the trademark lawsuit by startup IYO was “silly, disappointing, and wrong,” after the company claimed OpenAI’s partnership with former Apple Inc. Chief Designer Jony Ive’s AI firm, “IO,” infringed on its brand. However, a judge granted IYO a temporary restraining order, forcing OpenAI to take down a blog post mentioning the deal.
Altman pointed out that the founder and CEO of IYO, Jason Rugolo, persistently hoped that OpenAI would invest at least $10M in (or acquire) his company. The OpenAI boss clarified that IYO’s founder had sought an acquisition, an investment, and an intellectual property deal, but that his company decided to pass on the deal, and it was clear along the way.
However, IYO alleged that Altman and OpenAI heard their pitch, passed on it, got Jony Ive to try it before copying it, then bought his company for $6.5B and called it IO.
jason rugolo had been hoping we would invest in or acquire his company iyo and was quite persistent in his efforts. we passed and were clear along the way.
now he is suing openai over the name. this is silly, disappointing and wrong. pic.twitter.com/k5oKHGLw0s
— Sam Altman (@sama) June 24, 2025
Deedy calls it the most dramatic tech lawsuit this year
VC at Menlo Ventures, Deedy Das, asserted that this was likely the year’s most dramatic tech lawsuit. The IYO team claimed Jony and Altman’s actions were no mere coincidence, and that the duo knew about the company’s existence and the nature of its business since 2022.
The company also emphasized that OpenAI and LoveFrom kept tabs on IYO’s technology despite declining to pursue the proposed partnership in 2022. It mentioned that the Co-founder of IO, Tang Yew Tan, and another engineer (from LoveFrom or IO) ordered its initial product and pre-ordered the IYO ONE.
The IYO team gave details about regular meetings with OpenAI and LoveFrom, claiming that it had shared its vision, technology, and approach during those meetings. It also disclosed that seven representatives from the OpenAI-LoveFrom negotiating team received demo IYO ONE devices, which they said had promise and outrightly requested the intellectual property they embodied. The company claimed that OpenAI announced its acquisition of IO shortly after, the name of which was a homophone of its name.
“There are 675 other two-letter names they can choose that aren’t ours.”
-Jason Rugolo, Founder and CEO of IYO
IYO added that IO’s purpose was also to launch a product whose function was similar to and competitive with its product. The company claimed this was setting up unfair competition since the launch of IO was publicized internationally through major media companies, including CNBC, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times.
Judge Thompson grants IYO’s request for a temporary restraining order
Judge Trina Thompson of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted IYO’s request for a temporary restraining order, blocking OpenAI from using any mark confusingly similar to the “IO” trademark. OpenAI took down a video and other promotional materials about IO from its website following the order.
OpenAI released a statement almost immediately, explaining that the IO-related post was temporarily down due to the court order. It clarified that it did not agree with the order and was reviewing its options concerning the complaint.
On Tuesday, Altman wished the Iyo team the “best building great products,” adding that the world certainly needed more of that and fewer lawsuits.
The New York Times also filed a lawsuit against Microsoft and OpenAI, accusing them of copyright infringement and abusing the publisher’s intellectual property to train AI models. The media company sought to hold OpenAI to account for the billions of dollars in statutory and actual damages it believed it was owed for the unlawful copying and use of its “uniquely valuable works.”
The NY Times acknowledged the power and potential of “GenAI” for the public and journalism, but added that any journalistic materials should be used with permission from the original source.
The media house explained that it used independent journalism to report, edit, and fact-check content at a high cost, and with notable expertise. However, an OpenAI representative said that while the company respected the rights of content creators, it was both surprised and disappointed with the development.
Get seen where it counts. Advertise in Cryptopolitan Research and reach crypto’s sharpest investors and builders.
