The US District Court for the Northern District of California granted iyO’s request for a preliminary injunction preventing OpenAI and Jony Ive’s new hardware venture from using the io branding. Here are the details.
A little background
Last year, Sam Altman and Jony Ive announced that their companies would join forces under a new venture called io to develop products powered by artificial intelligence.
Soon after, a company called iyO filed a trademark infringement lawsuit. iyO filed a temporary restraining order forcing OpenAI scrub notes of a newly established enterprise from the Internet.
iyO and OpenAI in the following weeks submitted numerous documents shows that companies have been in touch before the io announcement, including product demos.
OpenAI claimed that some of this propaganda included unsolicited information and investment requests from iyO, while iyO recently corrected him a lawsuit alleging theft of a trade secret.
Meanwhile, iyO has also submitted the results of a consumer survey to the court, arguing that if OpenAI releases products too close to its own offerings, such as connected headphones, the brands are similar enough to cause confusion among customers.
OpenAI, for its part, defended its first product there won’t be an AI-powered wearable and added earlier this year is no longer scheduled io branding at all, asking the court to dismiss the case.
Which brings us to today.
The court sided with iyO
US District Judge Trina Thompson spoke in her decision yesterday granted iyO’s request For a preliminary injunction essentially prohibiting OpenAI from using the io branding.
In fact, Judge Thompson did not believe OpenAI’s decision to voluntarily abandon the io branding, raising questions about whether the company would resume using the brand in the future.
He added that if OpenAI doesn’t actually plan to use the token, the order shouldn’t make a difference, but if it does, it protects iyO.
It also concluded that iyO would “succeed on the merits of its trademark claim” and acknowledged that iyO could continue to suffer “irreparable harm (…), including the inability to acquire new investors, depletion of funding and extortion of brand equity (…)”.
You can read his full decision below:
After the order, the case now goes deeper. In a separate order also issued yesterday, Judge Peter H. Kang ordered attorneys for both sides to meet and consult on the ongoing discovery disputes and report to the court “no later than May 29, 2026.”
It’s worth checking out on Amazon
FTC: We use automatic affiliate links that generate income. More.
