Intel has positioned itself at the center of the storm after publicly supporting Wei-Jen Lo, a former senior executive at TSMC, who is now being sued by the Taiwanese foundry for alleged industrial secrets theft. The case comes at the worst (or best) possible time: during the fierce race for 2 nm nodes, the talent war in Arizona, and an industry obsessively focused on every lithography leap.
What exactly happened
TSMC filed a lawsuit at the Taiwan Intellectual Property and Commercial Court against Wei-Jen Lo, a former senior vice president responsible for part of the advanced process roadmap (5 nm, 3 nm, and 2 nm). Lo officially left TSMC at the end of July, but shortly after, it was revealed that he joined Intel.
According to the investigation underway in Taiwan, Lo is being investigated under the National Security Act after allegations surfaced that he left the company with over 80 boxes of data and documentation related to advanced processes, in addition to requesting detailed briefing sessions from subordinates just before his departure.
TSMC claims that the following have been violated:
- The employment contract signed with the company.
- The non-compete agreement.
- The confidentiality obligations and industrial secrets protection under Taiwanese law.
Intel’s response: “The lawsuit has no merit”
Just two days after the lawsuit was made public, Intel’s new CEO, Lip-Bu Tan, sent an internal memo to staff calling the allegations “meritless” and affirming that Lo has the “full support” of the company.
In the same message, Tan confirmed that Wei-Jen Lo will join the manufacturing group and the advanced packaging business, two key areas in Intel’s IDM 2.0 strategy to regain technological leadership and also position itself as a leading foundry for third parties.
Intel also emphasizes that it enforces strict policies and controls that explicitly prohibit the use of confidential third-party information: compliance clauses, internal training, and legal reviews aimed precisely at preventing the illegal transfer of know-how from rival talent recruitment.
A particularly sensitive case: the race for 2 nm
The dispute does not occur in a vacuum. It arrives at a time when:
- TSMC advances its N2 and N2P nodes, crucial for future generations of chips from Apple, NVIDIA, and others.
- Intel prepares to produce its 18A process and beyond in Arizona, with the declared goal of “leading the transistor race” before 2030.
Meanwhile, Taiwanese media and analysts point to an aggressive talent acquisition campaign by Intel in Arizona, offering salaries 20–30% higher and supposedly lighter workloads to recruit TSMC engineers in the U.S.
In this context, Lo’s recruitment is not an ordinary move:
- He spent 18 years at Intel before joining TSMC in 2004.
- At TSMC, he oversaw part of the advanced process roadmap, including 5 nm, 3 nm, and 2 nm.
His return to Intel, specifically to work in manufacturing and packaging, is seen as an effort to strengthen internal industrial discipline with someone who has firsthand knowledge of how the world’s leading foundry operates.
Where does experience end and industrial secrets begin?
Wei-Jen Lo’s case reignites a classic debate in the semiconductor industry, but with added intensity:
- Freedom of employment and talent mobility. Senior executives and engineers often move between companies throughout their careers. This mobility has historically been a key driver of innovation in Silicon Valley and Asia.
- Intellectual property and national security. When the stakes involve 2 nm processes and critical capabilities for supercomputing and defense, governments begin viewing these movements differently. Taiwan has already tightened its scrutiny over industrial secrets leaks to rivals or partners from other countries.
The legal red line usually involves the use of documentation, designs, process data, or software belonging to the original employer. Personal experience, general sector knowledge, or management skills are not inherently considered industrial secrets.
The challenge is that at such advanced nodes, the “how”—process parameters, lithography recipes, material integration, 3D packaging flows—is where much of the competitive advantage lies. Distinguishing that from the accumulated experience of a senior executive is not always straightforward.
Beyond Lo: what’s at stake for the industry
The court’s decisions in this case could set trends across several fronts:
- Tougher non-compete agreements. Should TSMC succeed in imposing severe restrictions on a former top executive, other foundries and chip designers might strengthen their non-compete and confidentiality clauses for key personnel.
- Increased regulatory scrutiny. With investigations already underway in Taiwan under the National Security Act over 2 nm technology leaks, a negative ruling could encourage other countries to follow suit to protect their national champions.
- Impact on talent wars. If legal boundaries tighten, companies like Intel, Samsung, and Rapidus may find it more challenging to hire engineers from TSMC without risking prolonged, costly litigation.
- Messaging to clients and markets. The public support from Intel for Lo, coupled with TSMC’s strong posture in court, signals that each company is determined to protect its critical technology and will not tolerate moves that threaten its future.
A legal and deeply symbolic conflict
Regardless of who prevails in court, Wei-Jen Lo’s case has become a symbol of the current industry phase:
- 2 nm nodes and 3D packaging as new battlegrounds.
- Fierce competition among foundries and chip designers to control the entire supply chain, from architecture to manufacturing.
- Governments closely watching talent movements as potential strategic risks.
If Intel manages to keep Lo in its manufacturing leadership without severe legal consequences, it will send the message that mobility remains feasible, provided certain formal red lines are respected. Conversely, if courts side with TSMC, we may see a shift toward much stricter restrictions on executive and expert movement among chip giants.
In any case, the litigation is expected to be lengthy and complex, with everyone—clients, investors, and governments—watching closely. Because what’s at stake here is not just the career of one executive but the control of strategic knowledge in an industry that has become critical for the global economy and geopolitical landscape.