Singapore has rejected xAI’s requests for documents from local companies as part of Elon Musk’s lawsuit against Apple and OpenAI. Here are the details.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Korea rejected xAI’s request seeking documents from Kakao, a local super app.
That was one of many requests that the US Court approved, where xAI (now owned by SpaceX) is seeking documents from international companies, most of them owners or developers of super apps in Asian markets.
In a nutshell, xAI’s lawsuit against Apple and OpenAI makes two main arguments: that Apple and OpenAI colluded to unfairly advantage ChatGPT in the App Store, and that Apple’s App Store rules are unfairly preventing X from becoming a super app.
As part of the second argument, xAI asked the US court to grant several requests seeking documents from foreign companies.
These requests rely on the Hague Evidence Convention, which provides a mechanism for courts to gather evidence from foreign entities in civil or commercial matters.
And while the Korean Supreme Court rejected Musk’s requests seeking documents from Kakao, many other requests remain pending, including those related to companies in China, Indonesia, Japan, India, and Vietnam. Which brings us to today.
One request that was recently rejected, and for which documents have only now been made public, was xAI’s attempt to seek documents from multiple companies in Singapore, including Gojek, Grab, GrabTaxi, and WeChat.
In a letter sent to the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Singapore’s Attorney General’s Chambers said it was “unable to accede” to all four requests because they did not comply with the Hague Evidence Convention for several reasons.
First, Singapore said the underlying case involves antitrust and unfair competition claims, which it viewed as outside the scope of the Hague Evidence Convention.
Second, Singapore said the requests were not specific enough about the person or entity to be examined. In the cases of Gojek and Grab, the response noted that the company names used in the requests don’t match the entities found in Singapore’s business registry.
Third, Singapore said the requests were too broad, echoing the same central objection South Korea raised when it rejected xAI’s request for documents from Kakao. Instead of seeking specific documents, xAI asked for whole categories of documents related to things like app usage, in-app payments, revenue, App Store rankings, Apple App Store features, super apps, customer switching behavior, and plans to add generative AI to those apps.
Like South Korea, Singapore characterized xAI’s requests as a fishing expeditions, something that the US court has also echoed when rejecting some of the company’s discovery requests in the past.
From the rejection letter:
In the circumstances, the AGC (Attorney-General’s Chambers of Singapore) consider that the Requests appear to form part of a fishing expedition, which is impermissible under The Hague Convention.”
You can read the letter in full below:
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。