一場旨在開創(chuàng)與人工智能聊天機器人溝通新方式的秘密競賽,如今正因一場商標糾紛而演變成了一場難堪的公開鬧劇。這場糾紛涉及OpenAI與著名iPhone設計師喬尼·艾維的秘密硬件合作項目。
此事近期又有新進展??萍汲鮿?chuàng)公司iyO Inc.此前已起訴艾維和OpenAI首席執(zhí)行官山姆·奧爾特曼商標侵權,現(xiàn)在又起訴一名前雇員,指控其涉嫌泄露了iyO未發(fā)布產品的機密圖紙。
這場激烈的法律糾紛的核心在于一個宏大的構想:未來我們與人工智能助手進行自然互動時,應該突破電腦或手機屏幕的束縛,或者對著像亞馬遜(Amazon)Alexa那樣的設備說話。能實現(xiàn)這種新AI交互模式的公司,將獲得巨大收益。
去年5月,OpenAI以近65億美元的價格收購艾維聯(lián)合創(chuàng)辦的產品與工程公司io Products,由此開始勾勒自己的藍圖。不久之后,iyO便以名稱發(fā)音相似以及兩家公司過去的業(yè)務往來為由,提起了商標侵權訴訟。
上個月,美國地方法官特里娜·湯普森裁定,iyO的訴訟理由足夠充分,案件將于今年秋季開庭審理。在此之前,她命令奧爾特曼、艾維和OpenAI停止使用io品牌,迫使他們刪除了相關網頁和所有提及該公司的相關表述。
本周,iyO在舊金山高等法院提起了第二起訴訟,指控其前高管丹·薩金特在與另一位io聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人、艾維的親密盟友、曾主導Apple Watch設計的陳騰耀(音譯)會面,違反了合同并盜用了商業(yè)秘密。
薩金特于去年12月從iyO離職,現(xiàn)在就職于蘋果公司(Apple)。他和蘋果公司均未立即回應置評請求。
iyO首席執(zhí)行官賈森·魯戈洛在上周四的一份聲明中表示:“我們絕非草率行事。我們的主要目標不是針對一位我們曾視為朋友的前雇員,而是要追究那些我們認為濫用權力對他施壓的那些人的責任?!?/p>
魯戈洛上個月對美聯(lián)社表示,2022年當他向與奧爾特曼和艾維有關的公司推銷自己的想法并展示原型時,他以為自己的策略是正確的。此后,魯戈洛在去年的一次TED演講中,公開詳細介紹了其類似耳塞的“音頻計算機”產品。
他所不知道的是,不久之后,艾維和奧爾特曼便開始秘密合作推進他們自己的人工智能硬件項目,并賦予其一個相似的名字。
魯戈洛在一次采訪中說,“我很樂意參與產品競爭,但連命名都要模仿,這實在讓我感到不可思議。這太令人震驚了?!?/p>
這個新項目在5月通過視頻公告公開亮相,而魯戈洛在大約兩個月前才向奧爾特曼發(fā)送了一封投資推介郵件。
奧爾特曼在3月回復魯戈洛的郵件中寫道:“謝謝,但我正在做一個有競爭性的項目,所以(抱歉地)就不參與了!”,并在括號里補充說項目名叫io。
在社交媒體上,奧爾特曼駁斥了iyO的訴訟,稱其行為“愚蠢、令人失望且錯誤”,這是魯戈洛這種“頑固分子”的一貫做法。法庭文件顯示,其他高管將魯戈洛向他們推銷的產品描述為失敗之作,在演示中無法正常工作。
奧爾特曼在一份書面聲明中表示,他和艾維兩年前選擇了“io”這個名字,參考了描述計算機如何接收和傳輸信息的“輸入/輸出”(input/output)概念。io和iyO都不是最先使用這個說法——谷歌的大型年度技術展示會就叫I/O,但奧爾特曼稱他和艾維在2023年8月就收購了io.com域名。
奧爾特曼表示,他的想法是“創(chuàng)造超越傳統(tǒng)產品和界面的產品。我們希望在AI的驅動下,創(chuàng)造出讓人類輸入需求和接收有用輸出的全新方式?!?/p>
已有不少初創(chuàng)公司嘗試開發(fā)AI交互硬件設備,但均以失敗告終。初創(chuàng)公司Humane開發(fā)了一款可以與之對話的可穿戴胸針,但產品評價不佳,并且今年早些時候該公司的資產被惠普(HP)收購后,這款產品便停止銷售。
阿爾特曼暗示io的版本可能會有所不同。他在一段已被刪除的視頻中表示,他已經在家試用過艾維給他的原型機,并稱其為“是世界上前所未見的炫酷科技”。
阿爾特曼和艾維仍未透露這到底是一款什么產品。但這場訴訟迫使他們的團隊披露了它不是什么樣子的產品。
陳騰耀在一份旨在區(qū)分該項目與iyO產品的法庭聲明中表示:“它的設計尚未最終確定,但它既不是入耳式設備,也不是可穿戴設備?!?
正是這份聲明促使iyO本周起訴了薩金特。陳騰耀在法庭文件中透露,他曾與一位“現(xiàn)已離職”的iyO工程師交談過,該工程師因對“iyO進展緩慢、產品計劃缺乏可擴展性,以及在無可銷售產品情況下持續(xù)接受預訂”感到沮喪而離職,當時正在尋找新工作。
與這位匿名員工的談話讓陳騰耀得出結論:“從根本上而言,iyO提供的是一種概念性產品,即宣傳一種實際上并不存在或功能與宣傳不符的產品。我的直覺是,避免親自與iyO接觸,并勸阻其他人這樣做。”
iyO表示,其調查人員最近與薩金特取得了聯(lián)系,并確認他就是與陳騰耀會面的人。
魯戈洛對美聯(lián)社表示,他在2022年首次通過奧爾特曼及其兄弟創(chuàng)辦的風險投資公司Apollo Projects向奧爾特曼推銷自己的想法,事后他覺得自己被欺騙了。魯戈洛表示,他演示了自己的產品,但該公司禮貌地拒絕了,理由是“他們不進行消費硬件投資”。
同年,魯戈洛還通過艾維離開蘋果后創(chuàng)立的舊金山設計公司LoveFrom向艾維推銷了同樣的想法,同樣被婉拒。
魯戈洛補充道:“我現(xiàn)在覺得自己有點傻,因為我們談了那么久。我和他們多次會面,給他們的所有相關人員都做過演示,至少有七個人在場。我曾多次與他們親自會面,談論了我們的各種想法?!?
譯者:劉進龍
審校:汪皓
一場旨在開創(chuàng)與人工智能聊天機器人溝通新方式的秘密競賽,如今正因一場商標糾紛而演變成了一場難堪的公開鬧劇。這場糾紛涉及OpenAI與著名iPhone設計師喬尼·艾維的秘密硬件合作項目。
此事近期又有新進展。科技初創(chuàng)公司iyO Inc.此前已起訴艾維和OpenAI首席執(zhí)行官山姆·奧爾特曼商標侵權,現(xiàn)在又起訴一名前雇員,指控其涉嫌泄露了iyO未發(fā)布產品的機密圖紙。
這場激烈的法律糾紛的核心在于一個宏大的構想:未來我們與人工智能助手進行自然互動時,應該突破電腦或手機屏幕的束縛,或者對著像亞馬遜(Amazon)Alexa那樣的設備說話。能實現(xiàn)這種新AI交互模式的公司,將獲得巨大收益。
去年5月,OpenAI以近65億美元的價格收購艾維聯(lián)合創(chuàng)辦的產品與工程公司io Products,由此開始勾勒自己的藍圖。不久之后,iyO便以名稱發(fā)音相似以及兩家公司過去的業(yè)務往來為由,提起了商標侵權訴訟。
上個月,美國地方法官特里娜·湯普森裁定,iyO的訴訟理由足夠充分,案件將于今年秋季開庭審理。在此之前,她命令奧爾特曼、艾維和OpenAI停止使用io品牌,迫使他們刪除了相關網頁和所有提及該公司的相關表述。
本周,iyO在舊金山高等法院提起了第二起訴訟,指控其前高管丹·薩金特在與另一位io聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人、艾維的親密盟友、曾主導Apple Watch設計的陳騰耀(音譯)會面,違反了合同并盜用了商業(yè)秘密。
薩金特于去年12月從iyO離職,現(xiàn)在就職于蘋果公司(Apple)。他和蘋果公司均未立即回應置評請求。
iyO首席執(zhí)行官賈森·魯戈洛在上周四的一份聲明中表示:“我們絕非草率行事。我們的主要目標不是針對一位我們曾視為朋友的前雇員,而是要追究那些我們認為濫用權力對他施壓的那些人的責任?!?/p>
魯戈洛上個月對美聯(lián)社表示,2022年當他向與奧爾特曼和艾維有關的公司推銷自己的想法并展示原型時,他以為自己的策略是正確的。此后,魯戈洛在去年的一次TED演講中,公開詳細介紹了其類似耳塞的“音頻計算機”產品。
他所不知道的是,不久之后,艾維和奧爾特曼便開始秘密合作推進他們自己的人工智能硬件項目,并賦予其一個相似的名字。
魯戈洛在一次采訪中說,“我很樂意參與產品競爭,但連命名都要模仿,這實在讓我感到不可思議。這太令人震驚了?!?/p>
這個新項目在5月通過視頻公告公開亮相,而魯戈洛在大約兩個月前才向奧爾特曼發(fā)送了一封投資推介郵件。
奧爾特曼在3月回復魯戈洛的郵件中寫道:“謝謝,但我正在做一個有競爭性的項目,所以(抱歉地)就不參與了!”,并在括號里補充說項目名叫io。
在社交媒體上,奧爾特曼駁斥了iyO的訴訟,稱其行為“愚蠢、令人失望且錯誤”,這是魯戈洛這種“頑固分子”的一貫做法。法庭文件顯示,其他高管將魯戈洛向他們推銷的產品描述為失敗之作,在演示中無法正常工作。
奧爾特曼在一份書面聲明中表示,他和艾維兩年前選擇了“io”這個名字,參考了描述計算機如何接收和傳輸信息的“輸入/輸出”(input/output)概念。io和iyO都不是最先使用這個說法——谷歌的大型年度技術展示會就叫I/O,但奧爾特曼稱他和艾維在2023年8月就收購了io.com域名。
奧爾特曼表示,他的想法是“創(chuàng)造超越傳統(tǒng)產品和界面的產品。我們希望在AI的驅動下,創(chuàng)造出讓人類輸入需求和接收有用輸出的全新方式?!?/p>
已有不少初創(chuàng)公司嘗試開發(fā)AI交互硬件設備,但均以失敗告終。初創(chuàng)公司Humane開發(fā)了一款可以與之對話的可穿戴胸針,但產品評價不佳,并且今年早些時候該公司的資產被惠普(HP)收購后,這款產品便停止銷售。
阿爾特曼暗示io的版本可能會有所不同。他在一段已被刪除的視頻中表示,他已經在家試用過艾維給他的原型機,并稱其為“是世界上前所未見的炫酷科技”。
阿爾特曼和艾維仍未透露這到底是一款什么產品。但這場訴訟迫使他們的團隊披露了它不是什么樣子的產品。
陳騰耀在一份旨在區(qū)分該項目與iyO產品的法庭聲明中表示:“它的設計尚未最終確定,但它既不是入耳式設備,也不是可穿戴設備?!?
正是這份聲明促使iyO本周起訴了薩金特。陳騰耀在法庭文件中透露,他曾與一位“現(xiàn)已離職”的iyO工程師交談過,該工程師因對“iyO進展緩慢、產品計劃缺乏可擴展性,以及在無可銷售產品情況下持續(xù)接受預訂”感到沮喪而離職,當時正在尋找新工作。
與這位匿名員工的談話讓陳騰耀得出結論:“從根本上而言,iyO提供的是一種概念性產品,即宣傳一種實際上并不存在或功能與宣傳不符的產品。我的直覺是,避免親自與iyO接觸,并勸阻其他人這樣做?!?/p>
iyO表示,其調查人員最近與薩金特取得了聯(lián)系,并確認他就是與陳騰耀會面的人。
魯戈洛對美聯(lián)社表示,他在2022年首次通過奧爾特曼及其兄弟創(chuàng)辦的風險投資公司Apollo Projects向奧爾特曼推銷自己的想法,事后他覺得自己被欺騙了。魯戈洛表示,他演示了自己的產品,但該公司禮貌地拒絕了,理由是“他們不進行消費硬件投資”。
同年,魯戈洛還通過艾維離開蘋果后創(chuàng)立的舊金山設計公司LoveFrom向艾維推銷了同樣的想法,同樣被婉拒。
魯戈洛補充道:“我現(xiàn)在覺得自己有點傻,因為我們談了那么久。我和他們多次會面,給他們的所有相關人員都做過演示,至少有七個人在場。我曾多次與他們親自會面,談論了我們的各種想法?!?
譯者:劉進龍
審校:汪皓
A secretive competition to pioneer a new way of communicating with artificial intelligence chatbots is getting a messy public airing as OpenAI fights a trademark dispute over its stealth hardware collaboration with legendary iPhone designer Jony Ive.
In the latest twist, tech startup iyO Inc., which already sued Ive and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman for trademark infringement, is now suing one of its own former employees for allegedly leaking a confidential drawing of iyO’s unreleased product.
At the heart of this bitter legal wrangling is a big idea: we shouldn’t need to stare at computer or phone screens or talk to a box like Amazon’s Alexa to interact with our future AI assistants in a natural way. And whoever comes up with this new AI interface could profit immensely from it.
OpenAI started to outline its own vision in May by buying io Products, a product and engineering company co-founded by Ive, in a deal valued at nearly $6.5 billion. Soon after, iyO sued for trademark infringement for the similar sounding name and because of the two firms’ past interactions.
U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson ruled last month that iyO has a strong enough case to proceed to a hearing this fall. Until then, she ordered Altman, Ive and OpenAI to refrain from using the io brand, forcing them to take down the web page and all mentions of the venture.
A second lawsuit from iyO filed this week in San Francisco Superior Court accuses a former iyO executive, Dan Sargent, of breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets over his meetings with another io co-founder, Tang Yew Tan, a close Ive ally who led design of the Apple Watch.
Sargent left iyO in December and now works for Apple. He and Apple didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
“This is not an action we take lightly,” said iyO CEO Jason Rugolo in a statement Thursday. “Our primary goal here is not to target a former employee, whom we considered a friend, but to hold accountable those whom we believe preyed on him from a position of power.”
Rugolo told The Associated Press last month that he thought he was on the right path in 2022 when he pitched his ideas and showed off his prototypes to firms tied to Altman and Ive. Rugolo later publicly expanded on his earbud-like “audio computer” product in a TED Talk last year.
What he didn’t know was that soon after, Ive and Altman would begin quietly collaborating on their own AI hardware initiative and give it a similar name.
“I’m happy to compete on product, but calling it the same name, that part is just amazing to me. And it was shocking,” Rugolo said in an interview.
The new venture was revealed publicly in a May video announcement, and to Rugolo about two months earlier after he had emailed Altman with an investment pitch.
“thanks but im working on something competitive so will (respectfully) pass!” Altman wrote to Rugolo in March, adding in parentheses that it was called io.
Altman has dismissed iyO’s lawsuit on social media as a “silly, disappointing and wrong” move from a “quite persistent” Rugolo. Other executives in court documents have characterized the product Rugolo was pitching them as a failed one that didn’t work properly in a demo.
Altman said in a written declaration that he and Ive chose the “io” name two years ago in reference to the concept of “input/output” that describes how a computer receives and transmits information. Neither io nor iyO was first to play with the phrasing — Google’s big annual technology showcase is called I/O — but Altman said he and Ive acquired the io.com domain name in August 2023.
The idea was “to create products that go beyond traditional products and interfaces,” Altman said. “We want to create new ways for people to input their requests and new ways for them to receive helpful outputs, powered by AI.”
A number of startups have already tried, and mostly failed, to build gadgetry for AI interactions. The startup Humane developed a wearable pin that you could talk to, but it was poorly reviewed and the startup discontinued sales after HP acquired its assets earlier this year.
Altman has suggested that io’s version could be different. He said in a now-removed video that he’s already trying a prototype at home that Ive gave him, calling it “the coolest piece of technology that the world will have ever seen.”
What Altman and Ive still haven’t said is what exactly it is. The court case, however, has forced their team to disclose what it’s not.
“Its design is not yet finalized, but it is not an in-ear device, nor a wearable device,” said Tan in a court declaration that sought to distance the venture from iyO’s product.
It was that same declaration that led iyO to sue Sargent this week. Tan revealed in the filing that he had talked to a “now former” iyO engineer who was looking for a job because of his frustration with “iyO’s slow pace, unscalable product plans, and continued acceptance of preorders without a sellable product.”
Those conversations with the unnamed employee led Tan to conclude “that iyO was basically offering ‘vaporware’ — advertising for a product that does not actually exist or function as advertised, and my instinct was to avoid meeting with iyO myself and to discourage others from doing so.”
IyO said its investigators recently reached out to Sargent and confirmed he was the one who met with Tan.
Rugolo told the AP he feels duped after he first pitched his idea to Altman in 2022 through the Apollo Projects, a venture capital firm started by Altman and his brothers. Rugolo said demonstrated his products and the firm politely declined, with the explanation that they don’t do consumer hardware investments.
That same year, Rugolo also pitched the same idea to Ive through LoveFrom, the San Francisco design firm started by Ive after he left Apple. Ive’s firm also declined.
“I feel kind of stupid now,” Rugolo added. “Because we talked for so long. I met with them so many times and demo’d all their people — at least seven people there. Met with them in person a bunch of times, talking about all our ideas.”