Source: The House of IT
IT House news on October 21 that a federal district court in Northern California has accepted Apple’s request for a “absence judgment” against YouTuber Jon Prosser, marking key progress in Apple’s lawsuit filed in July last year.
Earlier this year, well-known technology blogger Jon Prosser posted multiple videos on his YouTube channel, showing multiple details of what was later confirmed to be the new design language "Liquid Design" introduced in iOS 26.
In July 2024, Apple filed a lawsuit against Procter and his fellow defendant, Michael Ramacciotti, accusing them of illegally obtaining business secrets and violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which involved the information leakage.
Apple claims that Ramajotti illegally hacked into a development iPhone device owned by former employee Ethan Lipnik. Apple described the incident in detail in the lawsuit:
According to Ramadhotti himself, during his temporary stay in Lipnik, he used the location tracking function to judge when Lipnik was out for a long time and obtained its device password after entering the development for the iPhone – according to Apple’s policy, Lipnik failed to properly protect the phone. As he described in a voice message, Ramadhotti showed the developer through a video call the iOS system interface on the developer, demonstrating multiple unreleased features and applications, leaking confidential information about the unreleased iOS 19 (IT home note: finally named iOS 26) operating system.
……
According to Ramachiotti, it was Prosser who planned the operation and promised to "find a way to get [Ramachiotti] paid" on the condition that he was allowed to access Lipnik's iPhone for development, so that Prosser could steal and use Apple's confidential information for profit. Ramachiotti admitted that Prosser used a screen recording tool to record the entire video call. Prosser recorded the commercial secrets on the development machine into videos, saved them in personal devices, and disseminated these videos to others. At least one of them watched the video and reported to Lipnik that the apartment in the video was Lipnik's residence. In the end, Prosser made profits from advertising revenue by publishing a number of related videos on his YouTube channel, essentially seeking economic benefits from Apple's trade secrets.
In the complaint, Apple asked the court for a jury trial and demanded a ban, financial losses claims and punitive compensation (the amount is not specified), and asked the court to order Prozers from continuing to disclose any confidential Apple material in the future.
Prosser immediately denied Apple's characterization of its behavior, and initially said that he "looked forward to communicating with Apple on this".
After the deadline passed, Ramadhotti, one of the defendants, applied for a deferred defence, and the court approved the deferred defence until October 17.
On October 10, Apple filed a “default entry” application with the court, meaning the proceedings could continue without Procter’s involvement or defence.
To date, it is unclear why either Proussor himself or his legal counsel did not respond to Apple’s allegations. From a legal point of view, Proussor can still apply to the court for revocation of his absence, provided that it must prove that his failure to respond in a timely manner belongs to the so-called “excusable neglect” or other legitimate reasons.
If Prosser fails to file a valid motion, the court is likely to make a "default judgment" in favor of Apple in the subsequent stage. However, as this case also involves another defendant, Ramachiotti, the final judgment may not be made until the case is fully tried.