Apple and Leakers Clash Over iOS 26 Lawsuit
Technology outlet 9to5Mac recently published a detailed report. It highlights a growing dispute in a high-profile trade secret lawsuit. Apple, Jon Prosser, and Michael Ramacciotti filed a joint status report yesterday. Tensions continue to escalate regarding the leaked iOS 26 Liquid Glass feature. You can read more about how Apple, Prosser, and Ramacciotti trade blame.
The Origins of the Legal Battle
This contentious lawsuit originated in July 2025. Apple sued both Prosser and Ramacciotti at that time. The company accused them of improperly acquiring and disclosing unreleased software information. Furthermore, the litigation centers on a specific video published by Prosser. This broadcast revealed key details about the iOS 26 operating system. Consequently, it exposed the striking Liquid Glass visual overhaul before its official debut.
According to Apple, Ramacciotti illicitly accessed a developer iPhone belonging to an employee. He then allegedly used FaceTime to display unreleased iOS features to Prosser. As a direct result, the company swiftly terminated the involved employee.
Evidentiary Struggles and Document Demands
The October 8 status report reveals ongoing evidentiary struggles. Apple claims it is still waiting for Prosser to submit additional documentation. Specifically, the tech giant demands revenue reports and analytics from his YouTube channel. Moreover, lawyers want communication records between Prosser and third parties mentioned during his deposition.
Apple originally requested these crucial documents more than three months ago. However, Prosser firmly maintains his innocence regarding discovery compliance. He insists he has completely fulfilled his agreed-upon evidentiary obligations. Therefore, he strongly opposes Apple’s relentless pursuit of further materials.
Inconsistencies and Further Interrogations
Meanwhile, Apple also wishes to interrogate Ramacciotti once again. The company wants him to update his written responses to address alleged inconsistencies between the two defendants’ testimonies. In response, Ramacciotti established strict conditions for further cooperation. He stated that Apple must first clarify its resolution pathway. Additionally, the company must specify exactly what new information it still requires from him.
