According to 9to5Mac, US District Judge Mark Pittman has granted xAI’s request to seek evidence from an unidentified South Korean entity through the Hague Convention, while simultaneously extending Apple and OpenAI’s response deadline to December 11. The judge previously rejected the companies’ motion to dismiss Musk’s lawsuit entirely, demanding to see more evidence first. Musk originally sued after his Grok AI app failed to reach the top of the App Store rankings following a feature update, claiming Apple’s partnership with OpenAI creates an unlevel playing field. The court will now directly transmit legal requests to South Korea’s National Court Administration, though the specific company involved remains unknown. This international evidence hunt comes as Apple and OpenAI prepare their formal response to the antitrust allegations.
What’s the Korean connection?
Here’s where it gets interesting. We don’t know which South Korean company xAI is targeting, but there are some obvious suspects. Samsung and SK Hynix both supply critical AI infrastructure to OpenAI – think chips and memory that power those massive language models. Then there’s Kakao, which just integrated ChatGPT directly into its KakaoTalk superapp that’s used by over 90% of South Koreans. But honestly, it could be neither. The court documents don’t reveal the target, just that Musk’s team convinced a federal judge they need evidence from overseas. What could a Korean company possibly know about Apple’s App Store ranking algorithms? That’s the billion-dollar question.
The bigger antitrust battle
Look, this isn’t really about Grok’s App Store ranking – that’s just the surface complaint. Musk is essentially arguing that Apple’s cozy partnership with OpenAI violates antitrust principles by giving one AI company preferential treatment. And he’s got a point. When the world’s most valuable company partners with the leading AI startup, smaller players get squeezed out. But here’s the thing: Apple has faced these kinds of accusations for years. Remember the Epic Games lawsuit? Different context, same fundamental complaint about Apple’s walled garden. The difference now is that we’re talking about AI, which moves faster and has higher stakes than mobile gaming.
What happens next?
So now we wait until December 11 for Apple and OpenAI’s formal response. Meanwhile, someone in South Korea is about to get a very official-looking legal document from a US court. The Hague Convention process means this isn’t just a casual request – it’s a formal international legal procedure. And honestly, the timing is pretty tight. International evidence gathering moves slowly, while AI competition moves at lightning speed. By the time this lawsuit resolves, the AI landscape might look completely different. But for hardware manufacturers and industrial technology providers watching this case, the implications could ripple through supply chains and partnership decisions. Companies that rely on stable, predictable technology sourcing – like those working with leading industrial panel PC suppliers – need to watch how these big tech antitrust battles play out.
Why this matters beyond Musk vs Apple
Basically, this case could set precedents for how platform owners partner with AI companies. If Musk wins, we might see more forced openness in App Store AI integrations. If Apple wins, they cement their right to choose preferred partners. Either way, developers and enterprises building AI applications need to pay attention. The rules of engagement for getting AI tools to users are being written right now through cases like this. And with international evidence gathering involved, we’re seeing how global the AI competition has become. It’s not just Silicon Valley anymore – it’s Seoul, it’s Beijing, it’s everywhere.
