Apple sued the Youtuber, which is leaked iOS 26

Lecks are a Constant part of BIG Product News Cycles, especially for companies like Apple. Online wealth like Jon Prosser and Mark Gurman von Bloomberg have long predicted the content of the upcoming Apple announcements, and quoted anonymous sources from the company to give the insight into the next time. They often had real enough to become a real pain for the Cupertino company.

Now Apple has taken the opportunity to defend off against LECKS. In a complaint submitted on Thursday in front of the US Federal Court for the Northern District of California, Apple accuses the prominent Leaker Jon Proser, supposedly “to break into an iPhone of Apple development, to steal Apple's business secrets and benefit from the theft”.

In the lawsuit, it is claimed that ProSser, together with a co-configurator, who produces channel-tech videos on the YouTube, has intentionally exploited an Apple employee named Ethan Lipnik, who had access to a developer who was published with the unchecked software, which was available before accessing Lipnik, on which it was available. On Lipnik-Häuser, which was waiting for the Lipnik houses, on the way to the suit, in which the other houses suit suit had to build up. Development phone and shows details of the unpublished software to tell a video call. ProSser then allegedly used information that was given in this early look at iOS in videos that he posted on his YouTube channel, long before Apple officially announced the updates.

In the lawsuit it is also claimed that Ramacciotti claims [Mr. Ramacciotti] Receive payment. “

ProSser has contested any misconduct and says that the details of the suit are wrong. In public contributions on X, ProSser claimed that things did not go so that things went to an end.

“The details that Apple gave are simply not correct,” ProSser wrote about a direct message on X.

ProSser does not deny that he revealed the information from Ramacciotti. He highlighted the details about the unpublished update in a series of videos at the beginning of this year, including one in which he called the news, “the greatest iOS leak ever”.

Despite the question of how he actually acquired the information, the consequences were messy. Ethan Lipnik, the Apple employee who had the development telephone that Ramacciotti accessed, was released by the company. According to the complaint, Apple ended Lipnik's employment, “because Apple's guidelines were not followed to protect its confidential information, including development equipment and unpublished software and functions”.

Apple did not answer inquiries about comments. Ethan Lipnik also did not answer a request for comments.

“It's a big complaint,” says Ansel Sag, main analyst of the Tech research company Moor Insights & Strategy, in an e -mail. “But I also believe that between what ProSser says and what Apple claims, especially since the employee did not know what was going on.”

The biggest problem that is claimed here is that the data was taken from a development device that should be better protected, how this data was collected and where they came from should be checked before the details have been carried out into the world.

“Ultimately, every company fights against leaks, especially Apple, but this happens only in the United States in the United States to support its efforts much more power and laws,” says Sag. In the past, many Apple leaks come from sources outside the USA, such as: B. from his manufacturing and supply chain partners in Asia. Since the complaint focuses on events that allegedly took place in California, Apple can argue before the Federal Supreme Court that two US laws – violated the law on the law on the fraud and misuse of computers and the law on the computer of defense listening.

ProSser says he didn't even find anything about the lawsuit when he read a Macrumor's story about the registration.

“I feel terrible that Ethan has been terminated,” says Proser. “I wish he had shared Apple what had happened and I wish Apple had associated with me to get more answers – I would have loved to chat with you.”