The United States District Court for the Northern District of California has approved iyO’s request for a preliminary injunction, stopping OpenAI and Jony Ive’s new hardware initiative from utilizing the io branding. Here are the specifics.
### A Bit of Background
Last year, Sam Altman and Jony Ive revealed that their companies would collaborate under a new enterprise named io to create AI-driven products. Shortly thereafter, a company known as iyO initiated a lawsuit, claiming trademark violation. iyO obtained a temporary restraining order, leading OpenAI to remove references to the newly established venture from online sources.
In the subsequent weeks, iyO and OpenAI submitted several documents indicating that the companies had communicated before the io announcement, including product demonstrations. OpenAI contended that some of this outreach included unsolicited information and investment proposals from iyO, while iyO recently revised its lawsuit to claim trade secret theft.
Meanwhile, iyO also presented the findings of a consumer survey to the court, arguing that the brands were sufficiently similar to likely create confusion among consumers if OpenAI were to launch products too similar to its own, such as connected headphones.
OpenAI, for its part, asserted that its initial product would not be an AI-enabled wearable and mentioned earlier this year that it no longer intended to use the io branding at all, requesting the court to dismiss the lawsuit.
### Court Sides with iyO
In a ruling made yesterday, U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson granted iyO’s request for a preliminary injunction, effectively prohibiting OpenAI from utilizing the io branding. Judge Thompson was not persuaded by OpenAI’s choice to voluntarily discontinue the use of the io branding and raised concerns about whether the company might revert to using the mark in the future.
She noted that if OpenAI indeed does not intend to use the mark, an injunction should not pose an issue, but if it does, it offers protection to iyO. She also concluded that iyO “is likely to succeed on the merits of its Trademark Claim” and acknowledged that iyO could continue to experience “irreparable harm (…), including an inability to attract new investors, the depletion of its funding, and the appropriation of its brand equity.”
Following the injunction, the case is progressing further into discovery. In another ruling also issued yesterday, Judge Peter H. Kang instructed attorneys for both parties to meet and discuss ongoing discovery disagreements and report back to the court “no later than May 29, 2026.”