The two companies, both controlled by Elon Musk through SpaceX, filed to have their antitrust allegations against the iPhone maker struck from the record, according to Bloomberg. Their legal action against OpenAI, however, continues to move forward in the same Texas proceeding.
The original lawsuit, filed in August 2025 and titled X Corp et al v Apple in Fort Worth, sought damages in the billions over Apple's decision to embed ChatGPT directly into the iPhone operating system. Apple and OpenAI both rejected the allegations, with OpenAI noting that the arrangement carried no exclusivity clause. OpenAI also characterised the litigation as part of a broader pattern of legal harassment directed at the company by its co-founder, who has since departed. A jury previously ruled against a separate claim brought by Musk against OpenAI in May.
The filing requesting dismissal of the Apple claims contains no disclosed settlement terms or conditions. A voluntary dismissal carries no legal determination of the underlying allegations.
Europe's rulebook sits unused
The European Union established regulatory frameworks for precisely this type of dispute before the conflict ever materialised. The Digital Markets Act designates virtual assistants as one of ten core platform services subject to regulation, alongside operating systems, web browsers and application stores.
Yet no virtual assistant has received formal designation under the legislation. Commercial broadcasters across Europe submitted a request to the Commission in March seeking to change this, asking that smart television systems and assistants such as Siri be added to the regulated services list. The broadcasters' submission to Teresa Ribera relied on the qualitative pathway—the same mechanism used to bring iPadOS under DMA jurisdiction without meeting specific user thresholds.
The Commission released its initial assessment of the DMA on 28 April. The review concluded the law remained "well-suited" to address the emergence of artificial intelligence, determined that amendments were unnecessary, and declined to establish generative AI as a distinct regulatory category. Instead, the Commission indicated it would conduct further evaluation to determine whether certain AI services warrant classification as virtual assistants.
The conduct at issue in the Texas case falls squarely within Europe's existing regulatory categories but remains outside the scope of enforcement action. Apple has already shifted its strategy, committing approximately $1 billion annually to integrate Google's Gemini into Siri, while OpenAI spent recent months preparing its own legal challenge against Apple regarding this same partnership.
Apple initiated litigation against OpenAI in July, alleging theft of trade secrets and claiming the company and its hardware executive orchestrated a coordinated campaign to obtain confidential information concerning unreleased products. The case is already generating significant costs for OpenAI before any judgment is rendered. Meanwhile, the single European instrument designed to address this category of dispute has yet to be deployed against any party.
Source: The Next Web
