Apple faces iCloud lawsuit after after judge reverses victory
After initially dismissing a proposed class action lawsuit over Apple's allegedly forcing users to use iCloud, a judge has now accepted further evidence and ruled that the case must continue.
iCloud logo
Originally filed in March 2024, the class action complaint accused Apple of violations the Sherman Act and the Clayton act. The allegation is that Apple has established "an illegal monopoly" because of its requiring Apple device users to use its iCloud backup.
A year later in March 2025, US District Judge Eumi Lee in San Jose, California, dismissed the case. However, she allowed that the plaintiffs could file an amended case, and according to Reuters, they have now done so.
Judge Lee has furthermore ruled that the consumers involved in the case have added substantial new allegations. While Apple had defended itself in part by arguing that users were free to use alternative storage, the new complaint focuses on elements such as settings data, which are restricted to iCloud.
Apple's lawyers originally also maintained that the complaint was what was described as untimely. This is because plaintiffs ordinarily have a four-year window to sue under US antitrust law.
According to the court's new full filing, Judge Lee ruled that the case was timely because the main plaintiff sued within four years of her first iCloud purchase.
However, despite Judge Lee describing that timeliness claim as being premature, she has allowed that it may be revisited later. This is "because it is unclear when Plaintiffs' claims accrued and whether Apple engaged in a continuing antitrust violation."
Regarding the issue of how Apple says users are able to choose alternative cloud storage, the revised complaint argues that the company coerces its customers into choosing iCloud. The reasoning here is that few buyers choose alternatives, even though the Plaintiffs allege that iCloud is inferior to these other offerings.
Apple has not commented on the new decision. It is now required to file a response to the court by July 7, 2025.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
As far as I can see the only advantage Apple has over the others is name recognition. There are so many other options many people just go with Apple because they recognize the name and stick with it. It's easy. Not easier to use, but easier to pick -- you don't have to do any research or thinking.
And if there is anything obvious about America today it's that the majority of people hate to do research or think.
So from my point of view the real question here is whether Apple is responsible because their users are lazy.
Unfortunately, given that extreme laziness is obviously a very common trait among Americans, the lawyers for the plaintiffs here have an extremely good chance of convincing a lazy judge and lazy jury that their line of bullshit means that Apple is responsible for their client's laziness.
Maybe, it's not just laziness... Probably a hefty dose of stupidity too.