Apple recently filed a lawsuit in California federal court, accusing Chinese company OPPO and its former employee of stealing trade secrets.
Apple is suing former employee Chen Shi, who allegedly colluded with OPPO to steal confidential Apple Watch technology from Apple. The lawsuit alleges that Shi passed trade secrets to new employers after he was fired. More details can be found in our previous article.
Now it has become known that OPPO has responded to Apple's claims and, as you might guess, rejected all the accusations. In a comment to MacRumors, an OPPO representative emphasized that the company respects the commercial interests of other manufacturers, including Apple, and is not involved in the appropriation of its technology.
"We are aware of the recent lawsuit filed by Apple in California and have carefully reviewed the allegations in Apple's complaint. We have found no evidence establishing any connection between these allegations and the employee's conduct during his employment at OPPO. OPPO respects the trade secrets of all companies, including Apple, and OPPO has not misappropriated Apple's trade secrets. OPPO will actively cooperate with the legal process, and we are confident that fair judicial proceedings will clarify the facts," an OPPO spokesperson said.
In turn, Apple provided the court with a large amount of evidence, which, according to it, confirms the guilt of the former employee and OPPO.
In particular, it concerns messages in which Shi informed OPPO's vice president of health about the collection of information and holding personal meetings at Apple for the purpose of data collection. In response, an OPPO representative responded positively to the message, which, according to Apple, indicates that the company's management was aware of the wrongdoing.
The lawsuit also mentions that Chen Shi hid his intentions to move to OPPO's American division and instead said he was "returning to China to take care of his aging parents."
The lawsuit is ongoing, and more details are expected to be released in the coming months regarding the circumstances of the case and the possible implications for both companies.