Apple Scores Major Legal Win: US Court Tosses iCloud Storage Lawsuit—What It Means for Your Data
Apple just dodged a billion-dollar bullet—and iCloud users might pay the price.
The US Court of Appeals slammed the door on a class-action lawsuit accusing Apple of monopolizing iCloud storage. No damages, no injunctions—just a clean sweep for Cupertino's legal team.
The Core Issue
Plaintiffs claimed Apple's 'walled garden' approach forced iPhone users into overpriced iCloud plans by blocking third-party backups. The court? Not convinced.
Why This Matters
With 85% of iPhone users reportedly using iCloud (because what choice do they have?), this ruling protects Apple's 30% margins on storage upsells. Wall Street analysts are already baking in another revenue bump—because nothing fuels growth like regulatory loopholes.
The Cynical Take
Another day, another Big Tech antitrust case evaporates. Meanwhile, your 99-cent iCloud subscription just auto-renewed for the 84th consecutive month.
Judge Smith says Apple did not deceive consumers
The plaintiff, Lisa Bodenburg, alleged she subscribed to Apple’s 200 GB iCloud plan for $2.99 a month under the impression she would be added 5 GB of free storage. She was disappointed that her total storage was capped at 200 GB instead of 205 GB.
However, Judge Milan Smith of the Ninth Circuit asserted that Bodenburg got exactly what Apple promised, as their plan was always described as “incremental” or “supplemental” storage on top of the free 5 GB.
He further commented, “Apple’s statements are not false and deceptive merely because [they] may be unreasonably misunderstood by an insignificant and unrepresentative segment of consumers.”
Additionally, he referenced similar cases that were thrown out for relying on “unreasonable assumptions,” such as claims that Diet Dr. Pepper promotes weight loss or that a lip balm packaging was deceptive because some product was unreachable due to the dispenser’s design.
Apple under fire for misleading investors on upgraded Siri launch timeline
Although Apple won this case, it’s still involved in several lawsuits. Recently, some of the firm’s shareholders filed a class action lawsuit alleging it misled investors about the state of its AI advancements, particularly involving the Siri voice assistant.
The shareholders claimed the company understated how long it would take to roll out the upgrades, misleading investors about the potential effect on its stock performance.
Eric Tucker, one of the shareholders, argued that the firm presented its “Apple Intelligence” platform as a major selling point for the new iPhone 16, implying that improved Siri features would be available at launch.
However, according to the lawsuit, the iPhone Maker did not disclose that the more advanced Siri feature would be delayed until 2026. Analysts and shareholders were further frustrated by the company’s silence on the issue at the 2025 WWDC. The suit names Apple CEO Tim Cook, CFO Kevan Parekh, and former CFO Luca Maestri as defendants, and charges them with fraud and misrepresentation.
In a separate lawsuit involving allegations that Siri was listening without user consent, Apple agreed to pay $95 million to settle the case. The iPhone maker was accused of covertly listening to its users through Siri, with additional claims that the recorded audio was provided to advertising partners.
Nonetheless, the firm denied allegations that it sold Siri’s data, claiming it only agreed to settle to avoid more legal trouble. It insisted that the AI assistant prioritizes user privacy and stated that all individual audio recordings collected before October 2019 were permanently deleted.
However, claimants argued that the company recorded individuals who accidentally activated Siri without saying the wake phrase “Hey, Siri.” They allege that advertisers who received these recordings could scan them for keywords and personalize ads.
KEY Difference Wire: the secret tool crypto projects use to get guaranteed media coverage
