The case, which was filed in 2024 by investor Peter Landsheft in a federal court in California, followed announcements by Apple at its 2024 developer conference, where the company said a range of new AI tools would arrive with upcoming iPhones.

Those features did not appear when the devices launched later that year.

Shareholders argued the delay affected them, saying the company promoted features that were not ready. Apple later confirmed in 2025 that the upgraded Siri would not be available until 2026.

Under the proposed settlement, eligible iPhone users in the United States could receive between $25 and $95 per device, but the final amount will depend on how many claims are submitted.

The offer applies to devices that support Apple Intelligence, including the iPhone 16 range and the iPhone 15 Pro models, sold between June 10, 2024 and March 29, 2025.

Apple plans to open the claims process within 45 days of May 5, 2026. Customers will need to provide proof of purchase, along with their device serial number and Apple ID.

The company has not admitted wrongdoing. In a statement, it said, “Apple has reached a settlement to resolve claims related to the availability of two additional features. We resolved this matter to stay focused on doing what we do best, delivering the most innovative products and services to our users,”

Since introducing its AI drive, known as Apple Intelligence, in 2024, Apple says it has released several other tools. These include Live Translation, Writing Tools, Genmoji and a photo editing feature called Clean Up.

Attention now turns to Apple’s next developer event, Worldwide Developers Conference, where executives have confirmed the long-delayed Siri upgrade will be presented. The company is expected to outline how the assistant will handle more complex tasks and respond with better context.

Beyond software, there are also signs Apple may adjust its hardware plans. Reports say the base iPhone 18 could be pushed back, with more focus placed on higher-end models and new designs.

However, the settlement still needs court approval before payments can go ahead.

Elon Musk, a key early supporter of OpenAI, contends that the organization has deviated from its original mission of advancing open-source AI technology for the betterment of humanity.

The lawsuit, filed in a San Francisco court, accuses OpenAI and its co-founders, including Greg Brockman, of prioritizing profits over the nonprofit’s founding objective. Elon Musk asserts that Altman and Brockman persuaded him to provide substantial financial support to OpenAI with assurances that it would remain a nonprofit entity focused on countering competitive threats from tech giants like Google.

According to legal documents, Elon Musk contributed over $44 million to OpenAI between 2016 and September 2020, making him the largest donor during that period. However, Musk alleged that OpenAI’s recent collaboration with Microsoft, a leading technology corporation, symbolizes a transition towards commercializing its artificial general intelligence (AGI) research.

Central to Elon Musk’s grievance is OpenAI’s latest natural language model, GPT-4, which Musk contends represents a significant advancement towards AGI. He argues that OpenAI’s partnership with Microsoft to monetize GPT-4 contradicts the nonprofit’s commitment to advancing AI for the benefit of humanity.

In the lawsuit, Musk seeks to compel OpenAI to adhere to its original mission and refrain from profiting from technologies developed under its nonprofit status. He requests the court to recognize AI systems like GPT-4 as artificial general intelligence, thereby holding OpenAI accountable to its founding principles.

The legal complaint emphasized concerns regarding changes in OpenAI’s governance structure, with Altman allegedly hand-picking a new board lacking technical expertise in AI governance. 

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, comes at a time when the ongoing debate over the unauthorised use of published content to train artificial intelligence (AI) models is on.

The NYT’s lawsuit accused Microsoft and OpenAI of engaging in a business model founded on “mass copyright infringement.” The heart of the matter lies in the alleged unlawful copying and utilisation of The Times’s substantial body of work to train large language models, including ChatGPT. 

The lawsuit seeks “billions of dollars in statutory and actual damages” for the claimed infringement and emphasises the creation of AI systems that exploit and, in many cases, retain significant portions of copyrighted expression from NYT’s articles.

Microsoft, a key player in the lawsuit,  invests in OpenAI and also supplies the company with access to its Azure cloud computing technology. This close relationship adds complexity to the legal dispute, raising questions about shared responsibilities and obligations.

The lawsuit points to a potential turning point in defining the legal boundaries surrounding generative AI technologies. As AI firms, including OpenAI, attract billions in funding, concerns about the uncompensated use of intellectual property have grown within creative industries. This case could set a precedent for how media organisations navigate agreements and protect their content at a time where AI models can replicate and reimagine written works.

OpenAI, currently valued at over $80 billion, has garnered significant attention and financial support, with Microsoft committing $13 billion to the company. The lawsuit implies that OpenAI and Microsoft, by utilisng The Times’s content without proper authorisation, aim to benefit from the newspaper’s substantial journalistic investment without due compensation.

The NYT’s legal action suggests that ChatGPT and other AI systems created by OpenAI and Microsoft could emerge as competitors in the news industry. The concern is that AI-generated responses, utilising copyrighted material from The Times, may divert readers away from the newspaper’s website, impacting advertising and subscription revenue.

The lawsuit follows unsuccessful negotiations between The Times, Microsoft, and OpenAI. The newspaper had reportedly approached the tech companies in April to address concerns about intellectual property use, seeking an amicable resolution involving potential commercial agreements and technological safeguards around AI products. However, these discussions reportedly reached an impasse, leading to the legal action.