OpenAI recently secured a partnership with io, a hardware startup co-founded by Jony Ive, with a strategic objective to develop specialized artificial intelligence hardware; however, all public references to io have been removed from OpenAI’s digital platforms.
The removal of content occurred shortly after OpenAI announced its approximately $6.5 billion acquisition of the startup. This acquisition was intended to integrate io’s capabilities into OpenAI’s broader initiative to produce bespoke AI hardware solutions. Previously, an announcement blog post and a nine-minute video featuring Jony Ive and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman were accessible to the public, detailing the collaboration. The blog post, co-authored by Ive and Altman, stated, “The io team, focused on developing products that inspire, empower and enable, will now merge with OpenAI to work more intimately with the research, engineering and product teams in San Francisco.” These materials are no longer available across OpenAI’s official channels.
OpenAI has confirmed to The Verge that the acquisition agreement remains active despite the removal of the aforementioned content. The reason for the content’s removal is a trademark lawsuit initiated by Iyo, a company specializing in hearing devices. Iyo is a startup that originated from Google’s experimental development division, known as its moonshot factory.
This page is temporarily down due to a court order following a trademark complaint from iyO about our use of the name “io.” We don’t agree with the complaint and are reviewing our options.https://t.co/suwMRPTHqB
— OpenAI Newsroom (@OpenAINewsroom) June 22, 2025
Kayla Wood, a spokesperson for OpenAI, issued a statement regarding the situation, clarifying the temporary unavailability of the content. Wood stated, “This page is temporarily down due to a court order following a trademark complaint from iyO about our use of the name ‘io.’ We don’t agree with the complaint and are reviewing our options.” This indicates OpenAI’s stance on the legal challenge and its consideration of potential responses to the trademark dispute.
