Apple Fails to End Lawsuit Claiming It 'Broke' FaceTime

Advertisement
By Reuters | Updated: 1 August 2017 09:42 IST

Apple Inc has failed in its bid to dismiss a lawsuit claiming it disabled the popular FaceTime video conferencing feature on older iPhones to force users to upgrade.

US District Judge Lucy Koh ruled late on Friday that iPhone 4 and 4S users can pursue nationwide class action claims that Apple intentionally "broke" FaceTime to save money from routing calls through servers owned by Akamai Technologies Inc.

Neither Apple nor lawyers for the plaintiffs immediately responded on Monday to requests for comment.

Advertisement

Apple began using Akamai's servers after losing a lawsuit in 2012 in which VirnetX Holding Corp claimed that FaceTime technology infringed its patents.

Advertisement

Testimony from a 2016 retrial in that case showed that Apple paid Akamai $50 million (roughly Rs. 320 crores) in one six-month period.

The plaintiffs said Apple eventually created a cheaper alternative for its iOS 7 operating system, and in April 2014 disabled FaceTime on iOS 6 and earlier systems.

Advertisement

Koh said the plaintiffs alleged some measurable loss to their phones' value, and could try to show that Cupertino, California-based Apple's conduct constituted a trespass and violated state consumer protection laws.

The San Jose, California-based judge twice quoted from what the plaintiffs said was an Apple employee's internal email characterising iOS 6 users as "basically screwed" because of the disabling of FaceTime.

Advertisement

She also rejected Apple's argument that the plaintiffs suffered no economic loss because FaceTime was a "free" service.

"FaceTime is a 'feature' of the iPhone and thus a component of the iPhone's cost," Koh said in a footnote. "Indeed, Apple advertised FaceTime as 'one more thing that makes an iPhone an iPhone.'"

The plaintiffs are led by Christina Grace of Marin County, California, and Ken Potter of San Diego County, California, who both owned the iPhone 4. Akamai was not named as a defendant.

The case is Grace et al v Apple Inc, US District Court, Northern District of California, No. 17-00551.

© Thomson Reuters 2017

 

For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on X, Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads and Google News. For the latest videos on gadgets and tech, subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you want to know everything about top influencers, follow our in-house Who'sThat360 on Instagram and YouTube.

Further reading: Apple, Akamai, FaceTime, iOS 6, Apps, Mobiles
Advertisement

Related Stories

Popular Mobile Brands
  1. Best Diwali 2025 Wishes, Quotes, and Facebook Statuses to Share
  2. Madam Sengupta Is Now Streaming: Know Where to Watch This Bangla Crime Thriller
  1. Mysterious Asteroid Impact Found in Australia, But the Crater is Missing
  2. Thanal Comes to OTT: Everything You Need to Know About This Tamil Action Thriller
  3. Madam Sengupta Is Now Streaming: Know Where to Watch This Bangla Crime Thriller
  4. Ryugu Samples Reveal Ancient Water Flow on Asteroid for a Billion Years
  5. Scientists Create Most Detailed Radio Map of Early Universe Using MWA
  6. Mayor of Kingstown Season 4 OTT Release: Know When, Where to Watch Jeremy Renner's Crime Drama
  7. Our Fault Is Streaming Now: Know All About This Gabriel Guevara and Nicole Wallace Starrer
  8. The Conjuring: Last Rites Is Now Streaming Online: Know Where to Watch the Latest Installment from the Horror Franchise
  9. Delhi Crime Season 3 OTT Release: Know When to Watch This Shefali Shah Thriller Series
  10. Vast Space to Launch Haven-1, the World’s First Private Space Station in 2026
Gadgets 360 is available in
Download Our Apps
Available in Hindi
© Copyright Red Pixels Ventures Limited 2025. All rights reserved.