Apple is suing Jon ProSser for his iOS 26 YouTube leaks

Apple has filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of California in which Jon Proser was accused of abusing business secrets and violating the law on computer fraud and abuse. Here are the complete details.

If you follow the rumor mill, you will probably remember how Joe Prosser has held iOS 26 (or rather iOS 19) since January. First he passed a reconstruction of the camera app, then he published a few videos that reconstructed insights into what was actually to overhaul liquid glass.

And although some details of what Apple ultimately announced were different, probably because the material he had access to was still in the works, the leaks were in court. Now Apple has revealed how he received this information and what the courts should do about it.

Apple was tipped around the leak in April

In the lawsuit (about Macarize), The company says what a Michael Ramacciotti (another defendant in the lawsuit) dealt with, broke into the development of an Apple employee named Ethan Lipnik while he lived in his house:

“According to Mr. Ramacciotti's embassy, Mr. Ramacciotti used, while he was at Mr. Lipnik's house, the local tracking to determine when Mr. Lipnik would have disappeared for a longer period of time, acquired his passcode and had broken into his development -iPhone that Mr. Lipnik could not properly secure.

(…)

According to Mr. Ramacciotti, Mr. ProSser suggested the system and promised “finding a way for a way [Mr. Ramacciotti] To get the payment ”if Mr. Ramacciotti would give access to Mr. Lipnik's development iPhone so that Mr. ProSser could steal and benefit from Apple's confidential information. Mr. Ramacciotti admitted that Mr. ProSser recorded the video call with screenplay tools. Mr. ProSser took on videos of the trade secrets, which with the recording of Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr.

Apple in detail in detail to detail the length to protect its business secrets and how confidentiality plays a major role in its development process. The company also says that, although it was fired Lipnik, he had also had in the dark over what had happened until he learned from others, “through others who claimed Mr. Lipnik's apartment in a video recording by Mr. ProSser”.

Apple also claims that it does not know whether ProSser has more confidential material that he still gives, since “Development iPhone's iPhone also contained other unspoken design elements that remain confidential”.

What Apple demands the Court

In short, Apple asks for a legal proceedings that would make it possible for a jury to choose injunctive relief and penalty if the company wins the case.

Apple lists the following inquiries in the document:

• Judgment in favor of Apple and against the accused about all measures claimed here;
• Facilitation of omissions if the court is necessary and appropriate;
• Damage in an amount that is to be demonstrated in the procedure;
• Period of penalty based on the intentional and malicious embezzlement of the accused of
• Business secrets;
• An order that the accused proves not to use or pass on the confidential, written information from Apple without his written consent to third parties; and to return or support Apple to find and destroy such information in your possession, custody or control;
• Prejudment and after-judgment model interest for the maximum legal sentence, as a damage element that Apple suffered from the illegal and illegal actions of the accused;
• Adequate lawyers and costs were incurred; And
• Such a different relief as the court is fair and appropriate.

ProSser answers

ProSser Verser version of the events competed on X and briefly shared his own report on how he received the iOS 26 interface: