!@#$y behavior on Prosser's part, regardless of how the planning happened he KNEW he was looking at protected info & should not have been. Lawsuit looks justified from where I sit.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Sues Jon Prosser Over iOS 26 Leaks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Your understanding of the law and how it works is deficient at best, and by citing an unrelated case doesn’t make your view any less deficient, quite the opposite. I wouldn't be coming to you for legal advice if this is your understanding of the law. It's clear in this case that both parties had first hand knowledge of what was being schemed. The handling of stolen property isn't nullified just because someone else gave you the stolen items. Defending this isn't working, let the real adults deal with it instead. Apple have every legal right to protect their IP. if they didn't this kind of crap would become commonplace and Apple wouldn’t have a business model. Now if you still believe in your flawed premise, let my friend steal your phone, then pass on all your private information to me to post on social media if you think it's not illegal to do so.
I very much doubt Apple will win this one. The court doesn't care about Apple information that Apple thinks are secrets but a YouTuber has found and presented in a series of vague proxy demonstrations. He's not an Apple employee and has no contracts with Apple.
'Leaks', as a general rule, are often sanctioned by the company, using the press, influencers, and others to generate some awareness and promotional value of a product. In this case, what occurred appears not to have been sanctioned by anyone, not even through official channels.
If what Apple has stated is true, then individuals going out of their way to take possession of another's property, with the intention of learning design secrets or more, would likely be considered a crime. I am surprised the person who was terminated has not sued the other two. However, we do not know the extent of involvement of that former employee in this matter.
These individuals made poor decisions by using FaceTime and showing images with identifiable backgrounds. In other words, they left easily trackable fingerprints concerning their actions. I would not be surprised to see further legal action by judicial authorities.
I retired from a company that, yearly, sometimes more often, trained and retrained us on customer protected information, company confidential information, and vender confidential information. Apple, whether anyone likes it or not, is within its rights in this legal action.
If what Apple has stated is true, then individuals going out of their way to take possession of another's property, with the intention of learning design secrets or more, would likely be considered a crime. I am surprised the person who was terminated has not sued the other two. However, we do not know the extent of involvement of that former employee in this matter.
These individuals made poor decisions by using FaceTime and showing images with identifiable backgrounds. In other words, they left easily trackable fingerprints concerning their actions. I would not be surprised to see further legal action by judicial authorities.
I retired from a company that, yearly, sometimes more often, trained and retrained us on customer protected information, company confidential information, and vender confidential information. Apple, whether anyone likes it or not, is within its rights in this legal action.
Even if they did, it will probably still scare other employes that might be interested to leak information or not follow protocalls not to do so. Which in a way is a bigger win for Apple, as this leak has already happened. I think a lot of this is to stop the next leak rather than punishing this one.
Damn there was too many iOS 19/26 concepts that I’m not sure it really affected Apple.
Earlier this year, YouTuber Jon Prosser shared multiple videos showing off what he claimed to be re-created renderings of what was then presumed to be called iOS 19 and which was eventually unveiled by Apple as iOS 26 at WWDC in June.
In his first video back in January, Prosser showed off a Camera app redesign with a simpler set of buttons for moving between photo and video modes, and he followed that up with a March episode of his Genius Bar podcast where he showed off the Messages app, complete with round navigation buttons at the top and rounded corners around the keyboard.
And he wrapped things up with an April video that gave a more complete look at the Liquid Glass redesign that ultimately debuted in iOS 26, with rounder, glass-like interface elements, pill-shaped tab bars at the bottom of certain Apple apps, and more.
While the Camera app redesign didn't exactly match what Apple unveiled for iOS 26, the general idea was correct and much of what else Prosser showed was pretty close to spot on, and Apple clearly took notice as the company filed a lawsuit today (Scribd link) against Prosser and Michael Ramacciotti for misappropriation of trade secrets.
Apple's complaint outlines what it claims is the series of events that led to the leaks, which centered around a development iPhone in the possession of Ramacciotti's friend and Apple employee Ethan Lipnik. According to Apple, Prosser and Ramacciotti plotted to access Lipnik's phone, acquiring his passcode and then using location-tracking to determine when he "would be gone for an extended period." Prosser reportedly offered financial compensation to Ramacciotti in return for assisting with accessing the development iPhone.
Apple says Ramacciotti accessed Lipnik's development iPhone and made a FaceTime call to Prosser, showing off iOS 26 running on the development iPhone, and that Prosser recorded the call with screen capture tools. Prosser then shared those videos with others and used them to make re-created renders of iOS 26 for his videos.
Lipnik's phone contained a "significant amount of additional Apple trade secret information that has not yet been publicly disclosed," and Apple says it does not know how much of that information is in the possession of Prosser and Ramacciotti.
In order to protect its trade secrets, Apple has filed the lawsuit to request an injunction against further disclosure of Apple's confidential trade secret information and is seeking damages over the misappropriation of them.
Lipnik's employment with Apple has already been terminated over his failure to follow the company's policies to protect development and unreleased devices and software. Lipnik also failed to disclose the breach to Apple once he learned of it through others who recognized his apartment in the recorded FaceTime call, with Apple learning of the details from an anonymous email.
Update 8:55 pm: In replies to our tweet about this story, Prosser takes issue with Apple's presentation of the events, claiming he was "unaware of the situation playing out" and saying he is "looking forward to being able to speak to Apple about it."
Article Link: Apple Sues Jon Prosser Over iOS 26 Leaks
Good, this guy is a smug turd who ends up getting it wrong most of the time anyway. Apple has been on to him for a while clearly.
Apple will likely win this case. If the allegations are true, in the future, people will be loath to deal with Prosser, as he has most likely destroyed his career. I would not be surprised to see further legal action against Prosser.
He isn't a reporter, he's a YouTuber. BIG DIFFERENCE
Apple clearly have a case, they've filed an affidavit so they cannot make any false claims on it, that would be illegal, like stealing a phone with protected IP on it. They must have all the evidence to expose this scumbag which is why it's taken this long. Your feelings don't get to dictate if a case if worthy or not, only the facts do, and so far the facts are damning.
People saying this is a crime. Well, it isn't unless the police are involved and have arrested him and he's been arraigned by a judge. The fact is that this is a commercial civil dispute and he inveigled himself, as many, many do, with Apple staff to get as much info about the new design as possible. He saw it in early versions and did mockups by memory (or so he claims). If so, this isn't corporate espionage and he is not a rival to Apple and, aside from views, it was hardly for his financial aggrandisement. A case could be made that he brought significant promotional and marketing value to Apple in energising conversations and gossip that could only have put more eyes on the keynote. I'd really be surprised if Apple wins here.
Apple has form, actually, in lying to courts. They have been severely told off for it. Besides, this isn't about lies so much as lawyers building a case and, as ever, over-egging the pudding. You go in hard and knock the wind out of the defendant as far as possible. I've worked extensively with lawyers and also battled against them (usually successfully). They all use the same "tricks". The number of times they claim validity of claim or the existence of evidence when there is none! Unbelievable what they say when their client is paying for them to say it.
Good thing courts decide, and not you.
Just because someone filed a lawsuit, doesn’t mean they have a case. Speaking of feelings, calling someone a “scumbag” because you feel they did something wrong to one of your favorite brands is pretty strong feelings. People get emotionally attached to the Apple brand so if anybody says or does anything they feel is negative to that brand it’s like you’re talking bad about their religion. I like Apple products, but I don’t worship Apple.
You have never experienced Court in real life, have you? Apple is no saint and people/corporations lie to get what they want.
So your excuse for ignoring criminality is that you don’t like product designs. Classy.
He's paid someone for access, that the crux of the issue. Essentially bribed an employee to share company secrets.
I'm not giving nor claiming to be giving any legal advice. If you would be coming to me for legal advice I would tell you to hire an attorney. Whether the case is "unrelated", we'll see.
Prosser is stating otherwise though. Now, I don't necessarily believe he's telling the truth, but neither I blindly believe the plaintiff's allegations. Nothing is "clear" until both parties will have their chance of present their side of the story.
Talk about citing unrelated cases... how would a claim of First Amendment protection even begin to cover "stolen goods"? But you can bet it can cover reporting information.
If he colluded in obtaining the information illegally I'm all with Apple suing him into oblivion. If he only published the information a third-party misappropriated without his involvement, I don't think he is liable for that.
That could actually be perfectly legal for you to do if the private information you would decide to publish were newsworthy enough. There is plenty of case law supporting that.
