The US District Court for the Northern District of California has accepted Apple’s request to enter default against Jon Prosser in the lawsuit it filed last July. Here’s what that means.
A quick recap
Earlier this year, YouTuber Jon Prosser published a couple of videos showcasing multiple aspects of what turned out to be the Liquid Design redesign introduced in iOS 26.
Last July, Apple filed a lawsuit against Prosser, as well as second defendant called Michael Ramacciotti, accusing them of misappropriating trade secrets and violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act over the leak.
Apple claims that Ramacciotti broke into the Development iPhone of an ex-employee called Ethan Lipnik. Here’s Apple’s description of the timeline of the events:
According to Mr. Ramacciotti’s message, while staying at Mr. Lipnik’s home, Mr. Ramacciotti used location tracking to determine when Mr. Lipnik would be gone for an extended period, acquired his passcode, and broke into his Development iPhone, which Mr. Lipnik had failed to properly secure according to Apple’s policies. As he detailed in the audio message, Mr. Ramacciotti made a video call to Mr. Prosser and “showed iOS” on the Development iPhone. He demonstrated several features and applications, disclosing details of the unreleased iOS 19 operating system.
(…)
According to Mr. Ramacciotti, Mr. Prosser proposed the scheme and promised to”find out a way for [Mr. Ramacciotti] to get payment” if Mr. Ramacciotti would provide access to Mr. Lipnik’s Development iPhone so Mr. Prosser could steal and profit from Apple’s confidential information. Mr. Ramacciotti acknowledged that Mr. Prosser recorded the video call with screen capture tools. Mr. Prosser took videos of the trade secrets on the Development iPhone, kept them on his own device, and disseminated those recordings to others. He shared the recordings with at least one person who reported back to Mr. Lipnik that he recognized Mr. Lipnik’s apartment in the recording. Ultimately, Mr. Prosser profited off Apple’s trade secrets by, at least, sharing them in multiple videos on his business’s YouTube channel, from which he generates ad revenue.
In its complaint, Apple requests a jury trial and seeks injunctive relief, damages, and punitive damages in unspecified amounts, along with an order barring Prosser from disclosing Apple’s confidential material in the future.
Prosser immediately denied Apple’s characterization of the events, and initially said that he was “looking forward to speaking with Apple on this.”
The latest
After the deadline to answer Apple’s complaint passed, Ramacciotti requested an extension, which the court granted, moving his deadline to October 17. Prosser, however, never filed a response.
On October 10, Apple asked the court to enter default against him, which would allow the lawsuit to proceed without Prosser’s participation or defense. Last Friday, the request was granted.
It is still not clear why Prosser or his legal counsel haven’t responded to Apple’s complaint. Legally, Prosser can still ask the court to set aside the default, but only if he can show that his failure to respond was the result of so-called excusable neglect, or another justified cause.
In case that doesn’t happen, the court will likely move toward a default judgment in Apple’s favor. However, because the lawsuit also involves Ramacciotti, the final judgment may be delayed until that portion of the case is resolved.
Why do you think Prosser hasn’t responded to Apple’s complaint? Let us know in the comments.
Accessory deals on Amazon
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Source link
