Apple has initiated legal action against YouTuber and technology leaker Jon Prosser, centering on unauthorized information regarding the forthcoming iOS 26. The lawsuit alleges that Prosser conspired with Michael Ramacciotti to gain access to a Development iPhone, which housed early versions of the operating system. Court documents now reveal significant payment details between Prosser and Ramacciotti, providing further context to the case.
Recent court filings disclose that Prosser offered Ramacciotti $650 after a FaceTime call, contradicting Apple’s assertion that Prosser had promised payment for access to the Development iPhone. According to the documents, there was no prior agreement between the two regarding the payment, raising questions about the claims made by Apple.
At the time of the alleged events, Ramacciotti lived with former Apple employee Ethan Lipnik, who possessed a Development iPhone featuring an early prototype of iOS 26. Ramacciotti reportedly accessed the phone and subsequently contacted Prosser to showcase the software’s design. This exchange ultimately led to Prosser creating mockups based on the information obtained during the call, which were then shared publicly.
Current Status of the Lawsuit
The lawsuit encompasses both Prosser and Ramacciotti, yet their cases are progressing at different paces. Ramacciotti has requested two extensions to respond to Apple’s complaint, while Prosser failed to meet a recent deadline. This oversight prompted Apple to seek a default judgment against him. The reasons behind Prosser’s missed deadline remain unclear, but he has indicated that he has maintained “active communications” with Apple since the lawsuit began.
Apple’s firm stance on protecting its intellectual property is well-documented, as demonstrated by its response to prior leaks, such as the incident involving Gizmodo and the prototype of the iPhone 4. The company is renowned for its aggressive legal strategies to safeguard its innovations, and this case against Prosser is no exception.
As the situation unfolds, the implications of the lawsuit could resonate beyond the individuals involved, potentially shaping the landscape for technology leaks in the future. The case continues to attract attention as both parties prepare for their next steps in court.
