This article may contain affiliate links. Learn more on our Partner Program page.
There are new developments in the legal dispute between Apple and tech YouTuber Jon Prosser. In a joint status report with Michael Ramacciotti's legal team, Apple has released further details on the progress of the proceedings. These details focus primarily on the coordination of statements and the question of which confidential data was actually accessed. The case surrounding iOS 26 and the "Liquid Glass" redesign thus remains relevant both legally and within the industry.
In July of last year, Apple filed a lawsuit against Jon Prosser and Michael Ramacciotti, alleging the betrayal of trade secrets and violations of computer fraud and abuse laws.
According to Apple, Ramacciotti allegedly gained unauthorized access to Ethan Lipnik's development iPhone in early 2025. Lipnik was an Apple employee at the time and was later laid off. The lawsuit alleges that Ramacciotti used the development device to conduct a FaceTime video call to show Prosser details of the unreleased "Liquid Glass" redesign of iOS 26. Apple considers this a deliberate and unlawful disclosure of confidential information.
Course of proceedings: Cooperation and failure to meet deadlines
Court documents show that Ramacciotti cooperated with Apple and the court in the months following the filing of the lawsuit. The situation was different with Prosser.
He missed the deadline for formally responding to the lawsuit. Apple then applied for a default judgment. In October, the court granted this application. This means that Prosser lost his right to officially contest the allegations. The question of liability was thus decided in favor of Apple.
Prosser commented publicly on this move. He stated that, regardless of what was reported or stated in court documents, he had been in active contact with Apple since the beginning of the proceedings. The claim that he was ignoring the case was false. He declined to comment further.
Joint status report: Further votes
This week, Apple and Ramacciotti's lawyers submitted a joint status report. In it, both parties inform the court that information continues to be exchanged to a limited extent.
Apple says it is still working to determine the full extent of the data Ramacciotti was able to access on Lipnik's iPhone. Specifically, the investigation is focused on what confidential information was viewed or potentially shared. The document also contains important information about Prosser:
Apple served Mr. Prosser with document and deposition subpoenas. Mr. Prosser has acknowledged receipt of the document and deposition subpoenas, and Apple is working with him to coordinate a date for his deposition.
This is noteworthy because direct voting continues despite the default judgment. His testimony and further disclosure obligations are intended to help determine the precise scope of the confidential information affected.
Why Jon Prosser's statement is crucial
Even though the court has already issued a default judgment against Prosser, his testimony continues to play a central role. It is relevant for determining:
- which specific confidential information was accessed,
- to what extent this information was disseminated,
- what damage Apple suffered as a result,
- which legal remedies can be granted to the company.
While the default judgment essentially decided the liability issue in Apple's favor, the specific amount of potential damages and further legal action depend on details that still need to be clarified.
Apple's demands at a glance
In the lawsuit, Apple requests a jury trial and makes several specific demands:
- A ruling in favor of Apple on all grounds of claim.
- An interim injunction that the court deems necessary and appropriate
- Damages in an amount to be proven in the proceedings
- Punitive damages for the intentional and malicious misappropriation of trade secrets
- A court order prohibiting the defendants from using or disclosing confidential, protected, and trade secret information belonging to Apple without written consent.
- The defendant's obligation to return all information in its possession, custody, or control, or to assist Apple in locating and destroying such information.
- Pre-litigation and post-litigation interest at the applicable statutory maximum rate
- Reimbursement of reasonable legal fees and charges
- Other legal remedies that the court considers just and appropriate
The demands show that Apple is not only aiming for financial compensation, but also for clear legal guidelines on how to handle confidential company information.
Classification of the case
The case involving Apple, iOS 26 and the leak about the „Liquid Glass“ redesign touches on several key issues: protection of trade secrets, access to development equipment and the legal limits of leaks.
From a legal perspective, the issue is not solely about the published information, but primarily about how that information was obtained. The alleged unauthorized access to a development iPhone plays a crucial role in this.
The upcoming testimony from Jon Prosser could mark a new phase in the proceedings. Further disclosures will significantly influence the amount of potential damages claims and what additional legal measures will be imposed.
Apple vs. Prosser: Proceedings remain in motion
The legal dispute between Apple, Jon Prosser, and Michael Ramacciotti is not yet over. Despite the default judgment against Prosser, coordination and information exchange continue. The focus is now on coordinating his testimony.
The crucial question remains: what confidential information was actually accessed and disclosed, and what legal consequences arise from this? For Apple, it's about protecting internal developments; for the defendants, it's about potential financial and legal repercussions. The proceedings are therefore likely to continue to be followed closely. (Image: Shutterstock / Only_NewPhoto)
- Apple case designed to connect iPhone to satellites
- Apple and CSAM: Lawsuit raises serious allegations
- WhatsApp adds an important feature to groups
- Apple C1X modem: First failure raises questions
- Apple TV adds "The Hunt" to its March lineup
- Lawsuit against Meta: Apple becomes part of the debate
- iOS 26.4 opens CarPlay for ChatGPT & Co.
- iOS 26.4: This is what the new CarPlay streaming looks like
- Data leak: 1 billion data records exposed online
- Perplexity says goodbye to advertising
- Apple Music Connect becomes a promo hub
- iOS 26.4: These changes are barely noticeable
- iOS 26.4: New sleep metrics and vital data
- tvOS 26.4 removes iTunes apps from Apple TV
- Anthropic releases Claude Sonnet 4.6 update
- Apple upgrades Private Cloud Compute with M5
- iOS 26.4 makes Hotspot data usage visible
- Apple stock: Wedbush remains calm despite Siri
- iOS 26.4 Beta reveals traces of Apple Health+
- iOS 26.4: Code indicates Apple TV in CarPlay
- iOS 26.4: All new features of Beta 1
- iOS 26.4 makes Apple Music smarter with AI playlists
- macOS 26.4 introduces load limiting for Mac
- visionOS 26.4 integrates NVIDIA CloudXR
