Apple today challenged the funding behind a $4 billion UK lawsuit during a tribunal hearing, raising new concerns about the iCloud class action as the company battles further antitrust scrutiny.


The case was initiated by consumer group Which on behalf of consumers, alleging that Apple's iCloud storage practices lock users into the service and cause them to pay more for cloud storage than they would have paid under more competitive conditions. Which is seeking compensation and an injunction to prevent Apple from continuing the alleged conduct.

The proposed class period runs from 1 October 2015 to the present, meaning that the claim targets both historic and ongoing conduct by Apple. The application also seeks injunctive relief aimed at preventing Apple from continuing the alleged abusive behavior in the future.

Apple told the Competition Appeal Tribunal that Which had not provided enough clarity about its third-party funder, Litigation Capital Management (LCM), which is paying for the legal action. LCM recently suffered a severe financial decline, losing 99% of its share value from its November 2024 level, leaving it worth about $16 million. Apple argued that this collapse raised questions about whether LCM could still support the lawsuit.

It also said that if it were allowed to pursue an appeal later in the process or if Which's funding is withdrawn, Apple could face a significant risk of not being able to recover its legal costs because LCM might not be able to pay them. The company added that both Apple and the proposed class representative should have been informed sooner and more clearly about LCM's situation.

The funding dispute emerges days after the tribunal refused Apple permission to appeal a separate ruling in a long-running developer class action, which found that Apple had abused its dominant position in iOS app distribution and in-app payment processing. That judgment concluded that Apple's App Store commission structure led to higher prices for consumers and restricted competition, leaving Apple facing potential damages of more than $1 billion.

The tribunal has not yet indicated when it will make a decision and the hearing continues.
This article, "Apple Questions Funding Behind UK iCloud Lawsuit" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

Apple engaged in anticompetitive behavior by charging App Store developers "excessive and unfair prices" for app distribution services, the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruled today [PDF] (via Reuters).


The Tribunal found that Apple abused its market power by overcharging developers from October 2015 through the end of 2020. Developers were forced into using Apple's in-app purchase system and had no alternative to paying up to a 30 percent commission during that time period. The excessive fees ultimately led to higher prices for consumers.

According to the CAT, Apple had a monopoly over iOS app distribution and in-app payments. Apple's argument that Android and other platforms were viable alternatives for consumers and developers was rejected. The Tribunal also did not accept Apple's argument that its rules and fees were required for user security and privacy.

The end of 2020 in the UK's timeline corresponds with the launch of the App Store Small Business Program that saw Apple reduce ‌App Store‌ fees for independent developers and small business owners. The program reduced the commission that Apple collected from developers earning under $1 million per year to 15 percent, down from 30 percent. It's also when Apple began implementing other ‌App Store‌ changes in response to cases like Epic Games v. Apple.

The class action lawsuit was first filed in 2021 by Kings College London academic Dr. Rachael Kent, and the claim seeks up to £1.5 billion in damages. The period between 2015 and 2020 was selected in order to determine how much Apple will need to pay to UK consumers.

A damages trial is scheduled for November. Apple said it will appeal the ruling.
This article, "Apple Loses UK Antitrust Lawsuit Over App Store Fees, Faces £1.5 Billion in Damages" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

Apple's new M5 MacBook Pro will ship without a power adapter in the box in the United Kingdom and European Union, prompting online confusion that the change was mandated by EU law — a claim that is incorrect.


Apple quietly updated its online store following the launch of the M5 ‌MacBook Pro‌ to note that customers in the UK and EU who purchase the new 14-inch model will no longer receive a charging brick by default. The laptop still includes a MagSafe 3 cable, but buyers must purchase a compatible USB-C power adapter separately. The change does not apply to other markets such as the United States, where a 70W USB-C Power Adapter remains included at no extra cost.

The omission led some observers to suggest that the decision was required under new European environmental regulations. Some claimed that the European Union had banned manufacturers from including power adapters with new electronics in order to reduce electronic waste, but this is not the case.

The confusion appears to stem from the EU's 2022 Common Charger Directive, legislation designed to standardize charging ports and give consumers flexibility when purchasing new devices. The directive requires that all smartphones, tablets, and laptops sold within the EU use USB-C for wired charging. It also stipulates that consumers must be offered the option to buy a device without a charger to limit unnecessary e-waste.

The law "ensures that consumers will be able to purchase new electronic devices without having to obtain a new charger each time," but it does not prevent manufacturers from supplying one. In practice, this means companies must provide a version of each product that can be purchased without an adapter, while retaining the freedom to include a charger or offer it free of charge.

Apple's decision to remove the charger entirely from the EU boxes therefore goes beyond what the law requires. The company could, for example, offer customers the option to include a charger at checkout for no additional cost, as long as it also sells a version without one. The lack of charger in the UK is even more unnecessary, since it is not part of the European Union.

The move to charge separately for adapters is therefore a business choice by Apple, not a legal necessity. The company's approach simplifies logistics and packaging, avoiding the need for separate SKUs in Europe, but it also shifts the cost to customers who do not already own a compatible charger.

Apple has historically argued that omitting power bricks from its packaging is part of a wider environmental effort. The company first removed the charger from iPhone boxes in 2020, citing the environmental benefits of smaller packaging and fewer redundant accessories. Similar reasoning has since extended to other product lines. By reducing the size and weight of shipments, Apple says it can cut carbon emissions and limit use of resources across its supply chain.

The M5 ‌MacBook Pro‌ continues to support both ‌MagSafe‌ and USB-C charging. Customers can use existing 67W, 96W, or 140W USB-C adapters to charge the device, depending on the configuration. Apple sells its own USB-C power adapters separately, and the company's online product pages now prominently note that "power adapter sold separately" for the affected regions.

Pricing adjustments partly offset the omission in some regions, although shifts in currency exchange rates likely also factored into Apple's pricing changes as is common. In several European countries, the new 14-inch ‌MacBook Pro‌ is approximately €100 cheaper than its predecessor, but the UK model retains the same starting price.
This article, "EU Didn't Stop Apple From Including Charger With M5 MacBook Pro" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

The UK government's secret demand for Apple to create backdoor access to encrypted user data was far broader than previously known, reports the Financial Times. British officials didn't just want to break Apple's Advanced Data Protection feature, but sought to tap a swathe of standard iCloud services used by millions worldwide.


New court filings published on Wednesday by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPC) show the Home Office's technical capability notice (TCN) "is not limited to" Apple's Advanced Data Protection feature, reports the FT. The order also included requirements for Apple to "provide and maintain a capability to disclose categories of data stored within a cloud-based backup service," suggesting the UK wanted access to backed-up messages and passwords.

Perhaps most significantly, the court document states that "the obligations included in the TCN are not limited to the UK or users of the service in the UK; they apply globally in respect of the relevant data categories of all iCloud users."

The revelation comes after Trump administration officials claimed last week that the UK had agreed to drop its encryption demands following pressure from the U.S. director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and vice president JD Vance. However, the new filing suggests the Home Office has yet to formally modify or rescind its global data access demands.

Apple withdrew its Advanced Data Protection (ADP) feature from UK customers in February after receiving the secret government order, but the court documents imply this was only the tip of the iceberg. ADP provides end-to-end encryption for additional iCloud categories like Photos, Notes, and device backups, while standard iCloud already encrypts data in transit and at rest but allows Apple to access it with proper legal requests.

The case is arguably the most significant encryption battle since Apple's 2016 fight with the FBI over unlocking the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone. Apple has consistently maintained that creating backdoors would compromise security for all users and inevitably be exploited by malicious actors.

The IPC will hear Apple's legal challenge in open court early next year, although the UK government refuses to confirm or deny the existence of the Home Office order. The court has agreed to proceed based on "assumed facts" to avoid participants violating the Official Secrets Act.

One person familiar with the case told FT they were "still very concerned this is still going on," despite public statements from U.S. officials about the UK backing down.
This article, "UK Still Demanding Global Access to iCloud User Data, Filings Suggest" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums