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.
Here's the Latest on Apple Suing Jon Prosser Over iOS 26 Leaks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I completely agree with you in principle. Privacy intrusions intuitively seem wrong. That said, IANAL and want to understand exactly which law was broken, how, and by whom. I just find this stuff fascinating.
I found the complaint document (linked here) and there’s an interesting twist mentioned in point 8 on page 3: It appears that Lipnik’s friend/roommate broke into his phone while Lipnik was away and then FaceTimed Prosser for a demo of the phone’s features. Friend/rommmate seems more like the guilty party now. More to come, I’m sure.
It’s also going to be interesting what evidence is presented. Apple trumpets how their systems protect a user’s privacy (e.g., FaceTime calls are end-to end encrypted and even Apple can’t eavesdrop). I’m wondering what evidence they’ll present to make their case. Even accepting that a development phone may not have end-to-end encryption enabled, it would still be a bad look for Apple if the content of a FaceTime call was used as evidence in court. It would superficially give the appearance of a back-door - and we all know how the internet positively runs on superficial stuff.
IANAL. .. in this case, Prosser knowingly received stolen information?
Still, someone went into the candy store and took something that was not theirs to take. It seems to me that at least two people are in deep dookie.
There is no evidence that shows Lipnik willingly showed the development iPhone to either Prosser or Ramacciotti.
All we have are statements from parties involved, and Apple is the only one who has provided their own detailed account. An account that they will present in court so their lawyers must be confident of how the events transpired.
Prosser is playing dumb by not appearing in court and Ramacciotti is using delay tactics.
You’re drawing a conclusion from an assumption.
Apple will have detailed logs from the device in question and no doubt will be using that in court.
It’s irrelevant if FaceTime on a company-owned device had tracking abilities built in or recorded all calls. This isn’t a device sold to the public. Apple will face no backlash from this if it turns out they INTERNALLY record communications between employees.
Ramacciotti has no business whatsoever snooping around on another persons computer. This is compounded by the fact he knew Lipnik worked at Apple and was using a development device (which could have all sorts of trade secrets or other confidential information on it). That make Ramacciotti even more culpable as there’s no way he could claim he didn’t really know the extent of what was contained on the device.
I am very fond of your candy analogy. Even better while eating skittles.
Then is apple’s fault: you can’t put trade secrets out in the open and then expect that they are protected by law.
It won’t get to court because they are trying to squash the YouTuber with big bags of cash for lawyers as they have done to almost every company or person or government
Because they have the funds to deliberately drag it on & on so to drain individuals of funds.
Now it’s not about assumptions it’s more to do with this the guy is a YouTuber and nothing else
He is not some mad criminal mastermind
& apple can’t restrict his access because he doesn’t have any with apple
So this is all about control on their part to force him to fall in line.
Now unfortunately we live in a society where if this company was to sell toilet paper & say it’s the best ever certain individuals would be it regardless
not everything. The general interface design certainly is.
If this is only what they showed then the case will have zero substance.
And even less substance if the phone was left on the kitchen counter and not locked in a room or safe.
Your position is absolutely correct. They never signed an NDA and so they are at no fault.
Unfortunately people here are hell bent on defending their dear 3T$ company (who owns nothing to them) and fail to see that this is only a power play by Apple.
I don’t have any feelings for Prosser but the case has no substance and Apple will not be able to prove that the phone was locked in a secure storage which will make the case falter.
Basically they are being sued for looking into that guy’s panty drawer.
I believe the three individuals are at fault, the former Apple employee for negligence (most at fault here, IMO), the other two for looking too close where they shouldn’t have. Of these two, Prosser’s friend appears more culpable than the YouTuber. That said, let’s not lose sight of the fact that preceding each and every Apple product or software release, we are all eager recipients of a litany of leaks and speculation both true and false. By this standard, these iOS 26 leaks are nothing new. I will say that it strikes me as rather disingenuous that resource-ultra-rich Apple has chosen to go after individuals lacking such amplitude of resources, meaning financial and legal. Moreover, to the best of my knowledge, Apple has never once suffered the minutest drop in sales as a result of product leaks. If anything, these advance leaks and speculative product-feature guesses generate incalculable interest on Apple’s behalf and to its benefit. Apple’s stance also strikes me as quasi-authoritarian in nature and represents perhaps a manifestation of mighty corporations’ ever increasing grip on the very same people who year after year help keep their coffers overflowing with insane profits. If I were Apple, I’d drop the lawsuit like a hot potato, and fast.
You know looking through somebody panty drawer could incur civil and criminal penalties, right?
What are you waiting to hear? He ignored the deadline and the court will 100% enter default judgment against him. There won’t be any further details after that.
Yes, it’s trespassing. It’s never good but it’s not much if you don’t steal or damage anything. You get slapped on the wrist and forbidden from visiting the area again.
Idk what to tell you other than you're totally wrong. For one thing, any sales need to be approved by the judge and other creditors, who obviously have an interest in maximizing proceeds so they can get paid.
He didn't stab him in the back. He probably just felt that it was best to distance himself from Jon professionally since the lawsuit became public. I think I recall hearing Sam say that he has tried to contact Jon since then, but Jon has not called. So, it appears as though Jon is the one that stabbed his podcast partner in the back by putting the podcast's future in jeopardy so that he can gain some internet points. At first, I was upset with both of them. Since the time that they cancelled the Genius Bar podcast, I put all blame on Jon, not Sam.
I am sure that Jon lied about that part. That was probably a dig at Apple. Jon isn't very bright.