Elon Musk took his beef with Apple and OpenAI to court on Monday, filing a lawsuit that claims the two companies colluded to entrench monopolies in the emerging market for AI chatbots. Musk’s legal move, which escalates weeks of public criticism from the tech entrepreneur, follows Apple’s recent deal to give ChatGPT default access to iPhone features in iOS 18. The company has also made similar announcements to integrate ChatGPT on macOS, watchOS, and tvOS.

In a complaint filed in California federal court, Musk’s companies X and xAI allege Apple and OpenAI have entered an exclusive deal that gives ChatGPT special access to users and iPhone features, while blocking competition. The suit accuses the pair of violating antitrust and unfair competition laws in a move that threatens to block Musk’s ambitious plans to build an “everything app” atop Twitter, which he purchased in 2022.

Apple’s iOS 18, the complaint claims, integrated ChatGPT into the iPhone and default on Siri, the company’s Writing Tools, and other features. The deal provides OpenAI exclusive access to billions of user prompts, which X claims is critical for training and improving chatbot models, and from which rivals like Grok are barred. By integrating ChatGPT exclusively with its iOS software and products, X argues, OpenAI has gained a massive, near-term advantage over all rivals that cannot be overcome without similar access. The deal, the suit alleges, allows Apple and OpenAI to artificially control a market already dominated by ChatGPT.

At least 80 percent of the chatbot market, the suit estimates, already belongs to OpenAI, which could cement its position indefinitely if Apple’s integration remains in place. “Generative AI chatbots would vigorously compete with one another in a fair market,” the lawsuit states. “Instead, defendants’ anticompetitive conduct has handed a substantial portion of the market to ChatGPT.”

In addition to unfair advantages in the AI chatbot market, X’s suit says Apple was driven to strike the deal by a fear that a successful rival super app could one day make iPhones less essential, a position similar to WeChat in China. The suit even quotes Apple executive Eddy Cue, reportedly expressing concern that advances in AI could “destroy Apple’s smartphone business.” The entire deal, X’s suit portrays it, was a “mafia-style” act of collusion between two monopolists fearful for their future.

Apple previously struck a similar deal with Google to become the default search engine on iPhones, a partnership U.S. regulators have alleged entrenched Google’s own search engine monopoly. Apple, Musk’s suit charges, refused repeated attempts by xAI to work with it to integrate Grok into iOS, and Apple also rejected xAI’s requests to feature Grok in the App Store, including during the launch of a new “Imagine” feature. Beyond that, the suit claims Apple manipulated App Store rankings and held up Grok updates to stifle competition.

Musk’s lawsuit says the stakes of the dispute could not be higher. The future of AI-driven platforms, Musk argues, is at stake as Siri is used by Apple customers to handle 1.5 billion user requests every day around the world, a figure the suit claims is greater than the total volume of prompts received by all generative AI chatbots in 2024. Apple’s integration of ChatGPT alone would therefore give OpenAI exclusive control of as much as 55 percent of all chatbot user interactions, making it “an insurmountable lead.”

The effects on users, the suit also suggests, could be significant as well. Apple customers are at risk of having fewer options and less capable chatbots, as well as paying monopoly prices for iPhones, the suit charges. OpenAI, in turn, could use its dominant position to raise subscription prices in the future, with a plan to double “plus” subscription costs over the next four years. “That plan would be unfeasible unless OpenAI has power over marketwide prices,” the lawsuit alleges.

Apple’s and OpenAI’s deal may also disincentivize investment, Musk’s suit warns, as would-be investors will see little return on funding competitors if Apple continues to “press its thumb firmly on the scale” in ChatGPT’s favor. The move could also result in a brain drain from upstart startups to Big Tech firms, with Apple and OpenAI hiring from firms shut out of the market by a lack of investment, the suit charges.

For all these reasons, X also questions the financial logic of Apple and OpenAI’s own deal. The suit points to sources claiming OpenAI provided ChatGPT to Apple free of charge, and so paid for the partnership itself, while Apple’s own deal is expected to produce no near-term profits. Musk’s suit, therefore, suggests the entire partnership’s true value for Apple and OpenAI is not direct revenue but exclusive control of the market.

“By making the deal exclusive, Apple sacrificed the profits it would have earned by integrating multiple chatbots,” the complaint argues. “The true motive was Apple and OpenAI’s shared goal of blocking competition.”

Musk’s companies are seeking billions of dollars in damages and a permanent injunction to block Apple’s exclusive integration of ChatGPT with iOS and its other products. OpenAI, responding to Ars Technica, called the suit an “ongoing pattern of harassment.” Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Whether a court rules in Musk’s favor and agrees that Apple and OpenAI illegally entrench monopolies could therefore have lasting implications not just for Grok’s future, but also for the entire next chapter of AI innovation.