Apple courts

The main articles are:

• Apple
• Apple history

Apple courts in Russia

Main article: Apple courts in Russia

2024

EU fine €1.8bn for closing access to platform to other music service providers

Apple Inc. received a fine of 1.8 billion euros ($2 billion) from the EU after accusations that it had closed access to its platforms to music streaming rivals, including Spotify Technology SA.

The European Commission also obliged the company not to prevent music streaming apps from informing users of cheaper offers in Apple's App Store. The larger-than-expected fine was the first that the EU issued to Apple.

Apple began paying $97 each to owners of old iPhones - the company deliberately slowed down smartphones

In early January 2024, Apple began paying $97.12 to owners of old iPhones in order to resolve a class action lawsuit, the initiators of which accused the company of deliberately slowing down smartphones. Read more here.

2023

Apple will pay $0.5 billion to deliberately slow down old iPhones after the release of new models

In mid-August 2023, it became known that the court ordered Apple to start paying compensation in the framework of the protracted process of deliberately slowing down the work of old iPhones after the release of new models. In total, the Cupertino-based company will have to transfer $500 million to smartphone owners.

The process in question was initiated in 2018. iPhone owners have complained about spontaneous device outages and reboots. In their opinion, this is due to the mismatch of the hardware of devices, including batteries and processors, as well as the constantly growing requirements for the electronic part as the software is updated. The lawsuit says that Apple tried to solve the problem with an update, but this only reduced the performance of the smartphone.

Apple to transfer $500 million to smartphone owners

In total, about 3 million lawsuits were filed as part of the case, and a settlement was reached in 2020, when Apple agreed to pay up to $500 million to resolve the conflict. However, the beginning of the process of receiving compensation by iPhone owners was delayed due to the fault of two plaintiffs who objected to certain terms of the agreement. However, they lost the appeal, and the court ordered Apple to start transferring funds.

The amount of compensation is $65. It will be received by owners of smartphones iPhone 6, 6 Plus, 6s, 6s Plus and SE running operating systems of iOS 10.2.1 or higher, as well as owners of iPhone 7 and 7 Plus based on iOS 11.2 or later.

Apple itself says that the slowdown of the iPhone after the release of updates is explained by the addition of new features that create additional stress on the hardware. In addition, as it is used, certain components, in particular the battery, degrade.^[1]

Spain fines Apple and Amazon €194 million for squeezing competitors out of the market

On July 18, 2023, Spain's National Competition Commission (CNMC) reported fining Apple and Amazon for violating antitrust laws and conspiring to squeeze competitors out of the market. The total amount of recovery is €194.1 million.

The proceedings in question were initiated in 2021. The reason was two contracts that Apple and Amazon signed on October 31, 2018. As a result, Amazon gained the status of an authorized Apple dealer, which affected the online market for electronic devices in Spain. The parties, in particular, agreed to impose restrictions on other companies that retail Apple products on the Spanish version of the Amazon website. In addition, Amazon has limited ads that Apple's competitors could run. Those actions, according to CNMC, resulted in more than 90% of existing retailers that used Amazon's marketplace to implement Apple technology being blocked.

Spain's National Competition Commission fines Apple and Amazon

The two companies have unreasonably limited the number of Apple product sellers on Amazon's website in Spain, the regulator said in a statement.

After the collusion between the two technology companies, prices for Apple devices in Spain sold via the Internet increased markedly. In turn, Apple said that the agreement with Amazon was designed to limit the number of counterfeits sold on the online platform. Representatives of Apple and Amazon separately announced that the companies intend to appeal the penalties.

We reject CNMC's suggestion that Amazon benefits from excluding sellers from its platform, as our business model depends precisely on the success of third-party companies, Amazon said in a statement.[2]

2022

Apple will pay $50 million to sell laptops with defective keyboards

On November 29, 2022, Apple received approval from a California federal judge for its compensation program for users who initiated class-action proceedings over faulty keyboards equipped with a butterfly mechanism. The giant from Cupertino will spend a total of $50 million to resolve the conflict. Read more here.

Apple will pay 371.6 million euros for forcing distributors to set uniform prices

On October 6, 2022, the Paris Court of Appeal ruled that the fine imposed on Apple in the case for collusion with distributors and violation of fair competition rules should be reduced from €1.1 billion to €371.6 million. The company paid a fine for forcing distributors to set uniform prices.

Overall, regulators across To Europe the board are fighting to limit Big Tech's dominance with fines and regulatory action. Companies are showing a willingness to appeal the decisions, dragging out costly investigations for years. Apple said it plans to file another appeal to the highest court France to reduce the fine from €371.6 million to zero.

French court fines Apple 371.6 million euros for price conspiracy

{{quote 'We want to show our commitment to guaranteeing the deterrent nature of our fines, especially when it comes to market players of this caliber! Apple is trying to sell its goods directly, without intermediaries and fulfill the personal requirements of the customer, "said Virginie Guin, an employee of the antitrust department of France. }} In 2020, at an appeal hearing, Apple accused French regulators of violating antitrust rules for political purposes when it issued a record fine as part of a campaign to curb the dominance of tech giants. Writing a fine in 2020, the French agency said Apple conspired with two wholesalers Tech Data and Ingram Micro to thwart wholesale competition for non-iPhone products such as Apple Mac computers. The duo were also fined €76.1 million and €63 million.^[3]

Apple caught monopolizing payment systems for iOS devices

The company Apple received a lawsuit for the fact that iOS there is not a single one in the ecosystem, payment system in addition, in fact. Apple Pay This became known on July 19, 2022. The author of the lawsuit was the Canadian financial Affinity Credit Union.

The organization accuses Apple of creating a virtual monopoly in its own ecosystem. The lawsuit alleges a violation of antitrust laws by the company.

According to the authors of the lawsuit, what is happening in the iOS ecosystem harms competing payment systems, for which this market segment, despite its rather large size, is closed. The Affinity Credit Union document mentions far from only, smartphones iPhone but also tablets iPad. smartwatch Watch

Affinity Credit Union's lawsuit says Apple deliberately stuffed its mobile platform with restrictions so that not only could alternative payment systems not work under iOS, it bank applications could not be used to pay for goods and services. This allowed Apple to completely eliminate competition in this segment and make its Apple Pay an uncontested means of payment. As a result, Apple can freely take (and takes) a commission from issuers payment cards that users bind to their smartphones. This practice is simply not available to other services.

For each credit card transaction through Apple Pay, the company charges 0.15% of the transfer amount. For regular debit cards, the fee is 0.05%.

In all of the above, Affinity Credit Union experts have seen a violation of antitrust laws. In their lawsuit, they separately pointed out that other payment systems do not charge card issuers any fees. Google Pay and Samsung Pay were cited as examples. Affinity Credit Union experts argue that if there were several payment systems in the iOS ecosystem, Apple could hardly make so much money on transactions through Apple Pay.

Affinity Credit Union's lawsuit laid out two main requirements. The first is to open access to iOS to other payment systems so that they can also be used via an NFC chip in iPhones and other Apple mobile devices.

The plaintiff also wants to force Apple to pay compensation to all issuing banks forced to pay her a commission for work at Apple Pay for years. The number of such banks has not been established, the proposed amount of compensation has not been specified^[4].

Apple paid users $20 million for deliberately slowing down the iPhone

In early May 2022, Apple was ordered to pay iPhone 4S users compensation for slowing down their devices after upgrading to iOS 9 in 2015.

According to The Sun newspaper in the May 6, 2022 issue, it was filed seven years ago, and the company finally decided to resolve this issue. Consumers claimed that Apple falsely advertised an iOS 9 update offering improved performance on supported devices, which include the iPhone 4S.

Apple forced to pay users $20 million for deliberate slowdown of iPhone, but not in Russia

Apple has agreed to pay $15 to those iPhone 4S users who have experienced performance issues with their devices after upgrading to a new version of iOS.

The lawsuit against Apple was filed by a group of New York and New Jersey iPhone 4S owners in December 2015, according to reports. This is not the first time that Apple has been accused of slowing down the iPhone.

The company was caught slowing the batteries of other iPhone models to force buyers to switch to newer models. Apple was forced to add a battery status indicator for the models, allowing people to see how their iPhone's battery behaves over time.

Since the lawsuit was filed in the United States, only users from New York and New Jersey who own or owned an iPhone 4S and downloaded iOS 9 are eligible for compensation. It is not known if Apple is going to offer similar payments to those who bought the iPhone 4S in other markets and have upgraded to iOS 9.

In addition, legal documents state that people must submit evidence on pain of punishment for perjury that, according to their information, they downloaded iOS 9 or any version of it on their iPhone 4S... as a result, the performance of their iPhone 4S has decreased significantly.

The settlement is still pending, but as far as those eligible for the payout are concerned, Apple will appear to be setting up a website where they can sign up by listing their iPhone 4S IMEI number to get the money. Apple offers longer software upgrade timelines than most manufacturers in the market.^[5]

Apple sues Rivos startup over theft of trade secrets and poaching employees

On May 3, 2022, it became known that Apple had sued the start-up Rivos over the theft of trade secrets and the luring of employees.

According to Apple, the startup will develop its chips using the company's stolen developments.

Rivos hired several senior engineers from Cupertino. The company believes former employees stole service information at Rivos' request during the hiring process, according to the statement of claim.

Starting in June 2021, Rivos launched an organized campaign aimed at Apple employees with access to proprietary information and trade secrets about system-on-a-chip (SoC) technology, the company said in a complaint.

Before the lawsuit, the Cupertinians told the startup that former employees did not have the right to disclose confidential information, but did not receive a response.

Apple also accuses Rivos employees of stealing "gigabytes of confidential specifications and SoC design files."

The lawsuit explains:

Some workers used multiple USB drives to transfer materials to personal devices, accessed the company's most sensitive specifications stored in collaboration applications, and used AirDrop to transfer files to personal devices. Others kept voluminous presentations of existing and yet-to-be-released Apple SoCs marked 'Secret' and 'Apple Ownership' on cloud drives. One worker even made a full backup of the working device to a personal external drive.

The goals of Apple's lawsuit are to return trade secrets, protect confidential information from further disclosure and disclose the scale of use to reduce Apple's current and future damage^[6].

Fine of €5 million for the lack of alternative payment methods in the App Store

On January 24, 2022, the Dutch Consumer and Markets Authority fined Apple €5 million. The department believes that Apple's plan to allow alternative payment methods on dating apps does not meet the original requirements.

In early January 2022, the Dutch Consumer and Markets Authority (ACM) already warned Apple that it faces a fine of €5 million a week and a maximum fine of €50 million in total if the company does not change the terms of access to the Dutch App Store. On January 10, 2022, Apple informed ACM that it had made the necessary changes, but its application was rejected and fined. A Dutch judge gave Apple until January 15, 2022, to make changes to the service.

Apple began to fine millions for lack of alternative payment methods in the App Store

Apple was supposed to allow all developers to embed payment through the App Store and other payment systems. As of January 25, 2022, users of the service can choose only one of two possible options, which again contradicts the decision made by the regulator in August 2021.

Apple has been unable to adjust its terms, leaving dating app providers still unable to use other payment systems. The company was unable to take advantage of its potential in a critical situation and ACM is forced to resort to tougher measures, said Jeroen Bakker, spokesman for the Dutch Consumer and Markets Office.

Apple's payment policy requires the use of its payment system exclusively, where commissions range from 15% to 30%, which has long caused complaints from application developers. As noted in the publication, Reuters most likely the reason is that Apple does not yet have a tool that will allow you to charge a commission and track transactions in third-party payment systems. Apple announced these intentions at the end of 2021.^[7]

2021

Regulator in the Netherlands ordered Apple to allow alternative payment methods in the App Store

The main market regulator of the Netherlands said that Apple violates the country's competition laws and demanded changes to the payment policy of the App Store. This became known on December 28, 2021.

If the company does not comply with the requirements of the regulator by January 15, 2022, it will face a fine of up to €50 million ($56.6 million).

In September 2021, the regulator opposed Apple's policy requiring app developers to pay commissions ranging from 15% to 30% when buying digital goods, but did not impose fines.

Later, a US district court banned the company from restricting developers to payments through the App Store^[8] to^[9].

The court fined Apple for too weak protection of the iPhone from hacking

At the end of November 2021, a resident Brazil won the court against Apple after the blocked one was stolen from him iPhone and financial transactions were carried out. The court verdict testifies to the weak safety of the device from the American corporation and the inconsistency of the products with the declared technical characteristics. More. here

Amazon and Apple will pay €200 million for collusion squeezing sellers out of the market

On November 23, 2021, the Italian antimonopoly authority fined Apple and Amazon a total of more than €200 million for general cooperation to limit competition in the sale of products under the Apple and Beats brands in violation of European Union rules. The investigation found that some provisions in the agreement, which was concluded in 2018 between American technology companies, exclude the access of a number of Apple sellers who are not authorized by the company to Amazon's Italian website.

The agency imposed a fine of €134.5 million on Apple, and €68.7 million on Amazon. The watchdog also ordered companies to lift restrictions and give resellers access in a non-discriminatory way. Non-discriminatory access provides for equal conditions for the provision of relevant services to their consumers, regardless of their organizational and legal form and legal relations with the person providing these services. Apple and Amazon said they would appeal.

Amazon and Apple will pay €200 million for collusion squeezing sellers out of the market

According to Apple, original products provide a low-quality experience and can often be dangerous. The representative of the company noted that customers purchased genuine products, and the company worked closely with reseller partners and had special groups of experts around the world who work with law enforcement agencies, customs and sellers to ensure that only genuine products of the company are sold. Working with select resellers helps keep customers safe by guaranteeing product authenticity, Apple said.

The Italian antimonopoly watchdog points out that this violates the rights of both sellers and consumers. Due diligence by the government department began in July 2020, when one of the intermediaries excluded by Amazon filed a formal complaint. According to the ministry, the decision was made in accordance with the provisions of the European Union, which do not allow discriminatory commercial policies. Similar sanctions were also adopted by regulatory authorities in Germany and Spain.^[10]

Payment of compensation to store employees who checked bags after a shift

In mid-November 2021, Apple satisfied a class action lawsuit in the amount of $29.9 million from over 14 thousand employees of its stores in California, who were forced to undergo a bag check after the end of the working day.

According to Bloomberg, 14,683 employees from 52 Apple stores in California who worked for the company from July 2009 to December 2015 went to court in connection with checking their bags after the end of the working day for theft of devices from stores.

Apple will pay $1,286 each to store employees who checked bags after a shift

Searches, which were to be carried out by a manager or security guard, usually took 5 to 20 minutes, but on the busiest days this procedure could take up to 45 minutes. Employees were searched before leaving for lunch and at the end of the work shift. Failure to pass the examination could lead to disciplinary action or dismissal. Such actions of the company violated state laws, since employees were not paid for the time spent.

A class action lawsuit was filed back in 2013, but in 2015 a judge granted the corporation's request to dismiss the claim. Apple said those who disagreed with its policies may not have brought bags to work. In 2020, through the court of appeal, the case was resumed, the final decision determined that the employer still had to pay employees the time spent checking bags.

It is estimated that each plaintiff will receive an average of 1,286 compensation. Apple clarified that the checks were stopped in December 2015. The Supreme Court ruling says Apple's claim that employees can simply leave their phones at home if they don't want to be checked as part of unpaid searches is paradoxical, as the company itself claims that its iPhone product is an "integrated and integral" part of a person's life.^[11]

$95 million fine for replacing new iPhones with restored ones

In early October 2021, Apple agreed to pay about $95 million in a class action lawsuit in which users accused the company of violating the so-called Magnuson-Moss Guarantee Act and other US laws. It is believed that the company provided restored devices instead of new ones as a replacement for warranty coupons.

The agreement applies to American plaintiffs who purchased AppleCare Protection Plan or AppleCare + directly or through an iPhone update program after July 20, 2012 and received a repaired device in return. Now the parties have reached an agreement on this case, and if it is approved by the court, each of the plaintiffs will receive compensation corresponding to the number of problematic gadgets.

Apple received a fine of $95 million for replacing new iPhones with restored ones

The provision on Apple's repair conditions in the United States says that when servicing a customer's product, the company can use parts or products that are new or restored and are equivalent to new in performance and reliability. However, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit argued that the refurbished or repaired devices are not equivalent to new ones in performance and reliability, and therefore sought monetary damages from Apple.

Buyers will receive from $63.4 million to $68.1 million; the rest of the money that Apple will pay will be used to pay legal and other expenses. The class action lawsuit was filed back in 2016 in California.

It is known that Apple actively denied the fact that the restored devices are worse than the new ones, but chose to come to an agreement with the plaintiffs, estimating the possible costs of continuing the lawsuit. The agreement will be officially approved by the court on or before October 20, 2021.

Apple's plans involve providing consumers with devices that are equivalent to new ones in terms of performance and reliability. Recovered devices can never be equivalent to new ones in performance and reliability. The plaintiffs argue that this means restored, that is, a second-hand device that has been modified.

It follows from the lawsuit itself that the term, new, means a device that was never in use or previously sold and consists of all new parts. And the term, restored, appears only 1 times in the rules and conditions of AppleCare +, despite the fact that the printed booklet consists of 33 pages^[12]

Apple punished $300 million for using other people's LTE technologies

On August 13, 2021, Apple must pay a lump sum of $300 million for violating patents for wireless standard technologies owned by Optis Wireless Technology and its branches. Read more here.

Apple paid millions to a girl whose intimate photos were leaked to the Internet in a service center

In early June 2021, it became known that Apple paid millions of dollars to a girl whose intimate photos were leaked to the Internet in an authorized service center. The latter does not belong to the company itself, but to its partner.

In 2016, a 21-year-old student handed over her iPhone for repair to a workshop in California. Later, on her Facebook page, she saw candid pictures and videos that were posted on the social network by employees of the service center. In total, about 10 photos were posted on the Web, in which the girl was captured undressed, as well as several videos of a sexual nature. The explicit content was later removed when friends of the victim told her about the publication.

Apple paid multimillion-dollar compensation to the owner of the iPhone, which in 2016 sent the device for repair to a specialized center, and two of its employees posted candid pictures from a smartphone on the girl's Facebook account

She went to court accusing Apple of trespassing and causing emotional distress. According to The Telegraph, in order to resolve this scandal, Apple paid millions of dollars (the exact amount remained a secret, but it is known that initially the plaintiff demanded $5 million) in the form of compensation. And the employees involved in this case were fired.

When we learned of this flagrant violation of our policy from one of our contractors in 2016, we took immediate action and have since continued to strengthen the protocols of our partners, Apple said.

The company demanded the full confidentiality of the case over concerns that the publicity could lead to significant damage to the business. Since the incident, the tech giant has continued to tighten employee rules .

According to the regulations, Apple service centers require customers to disable passwords in devices to gain full access during repairs. It is recommended to make backups and reset to factory settings, but these options are not available in particularly difficult cases.^[13]

Apple to pay $300m for PMC patent infringement

At the end of March 2021, a federal jury in the US state of Texas ordered Apple to pay more than $300 million in favor of Personalized Media Communications (PMC). Apple is accused of violating a patent related to digital rights management (DRM). Read more here.

2020

Apple to pay €10m for cheating in iPhone waterproof claims

At the end of November 2020, the antitrust regulator Italy Autorita 'Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM) fined Apple €10 million for "aggressive and misleading" advertising. iPhone More. here

Apple will pay $113 million to US authorities for deliberately slowing down old iPhone models

On November 18, 2020, it became known about a new settlement agreement, which Apple was concluded with the authorities of 34 USA states and the District of Columbia. Under the terms of the agreement, the company will pay $113 million for a deliberate and secret slowdown smartphones iPhone by releasing updates for. operating system iOS

The company equipped some phone models with batteries that tended to lose substantially the ability to hold a charge over time, according to lawsuits state prosecutors filed against Apple. Apple tried to solve this problem with special updates, which, as it turned out during the investigation, reduced the performance of devices. At the same time, in the case of replacing the battery with a new device, it began to work as before. As noted by The Washington Post, many saw in the actions of the American corporation to persuade customers to purchase new iPhone models.

Apple will pay American authorities $113 million for deliberately slowing down old iPhones

The company must stop manipulating consumers and tell them the full truth about its working methods and products. I pledge to prosecute these giant tech companies if they hide the truth from their users, "Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich said after the verdict on the fine for Apple was announced.

In addition to the cash payment, the settlement assumes that Apple will have to provide "truthful information" about iPhone power management on its website, in the software update notes and in the iPhone settings in the next three years.

It is noted that this settlement is not related to the earlier deal on a class action lawsuit to slow down processors, in which Apple agreed to pay $500 million to owners of certain iPhone models.^[14]

Apple will pay VirnetX a royalty of $502.8 million for using a VPN service

In early November 2020, it became known that, according to a decision of a federal court in Texas, Apple must pay VirnetX $502.8 million as a royalty for using the VPN on Demand function, which allows iOS users to access a VPN connection. Read more here.

Apple could suffer in antitrust lawsuit against Google

The US Department of Justice revealed the details of the deal between Google and Apple, as a result of which Apple receives up to $12 billion a year. This became known on October 21, 2020.

Apple may have problems due to an agreement with Google to use on a reimbursable basis search engine by default on its devices, including and smartphones. tablets When buying Apple devices, users inevitably browser Safari go to the Google search page by launching.

According to data to the Ministry of Justice, USA about half of Google's traffic received in 2019 thanks to search queries came from Apple devices. The US Department of Justice in its lawsuit mentions a document in which the completed transaction appears as a "significant source of income." The court information will verify that Apple receives up to $12 billion a year from Google for pre-installing their search engine.

Apple, in its defense, said it does not block the use of third-party search engines or the transition to their sites from its own-brand mobile devices.

On October 20, 2020, the US Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the American corporation Google, accusing it of monopoly.^[15] Accused of Abusing Its Online Search Dominance to Destroy Competition That Harmed Consumers^[16], Apple Could^[17]

Apple to pay $9.75 million to headphone users left unhappy with battery life

On August 27, 2020, it became known that Apple agreed to settle a class action lawsuit and pay compensation to buyers of Beats Powerbeats2 Wireless headphones, who had a number of complaints about the quality of the product. Read more here.

Epic Games sues Apple, Google for removing Fortnite from app stores

On August 14, 2020, it became known that the developer of computer games Epic Games filed lawsuits against Apple Inc. and Google (part of Alphabet Inc.), accusing the company of violating antitrust laws.

The company filed lawsuits after Apple and Google removed Fortnite, a game developed by Epic, from their app stores. This is due to the fact that the company invited users to make purchases inside the game directly in order to reduce their cost. Read more here.

The court ordered Apple to pay $0.5 billion for theft of LTE technologies

In mid-August 2020, a Texas court ordered Apple to pay Optis Wireless Technology compensation in the amount of $506.2 million for violating the rights to use patents related to LTE technology in iPhone smartphones and some other devices.

The court found the infringement of five patents and found the willfulness of the infringement. Apple said the patents were invalid.

Such lawsuits by companies that accumulate patents simply to pursue companies in the industry serve only to suppress innovation and harm consumers, the US corporation said.

Apple will pay $0.5 billion for theft of LTE technologies

We are talking about the following patents:

• "A method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving common control channel messages in a wireless communication system using orthogonal frequency division multiple access";
• "Method of transmitting and receiving control information via PDCCH";
• "Mobile station equipment and random access method";
• "Channel Estimation System and Method in a Delay Diversity Wireless Communication System";
• "Uplink Signaling Method";
• "Switching between SU-MIMO and MU-MIMO";
• "Control channel signaling using common signaling field for transport format and backup versions."

Optis and its partners Panoptis and Unwired Planet LLC claim that Apple's LTE communication standard technology used their technology.

Just before the initial lawsuit was filed, Apple initiated a process to close all of its stores in the Eastern District, Texas presumably to avoid patent infringement litigation in a jurisdiction that is a favorite habitat for patent trolls. However, the Optis lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, and a jury trial was also held there.^[18]

China's Xiao-i files $1.4 billion lawsuit against Apple, accusing it of violating patent on voice assistant

On August 3, 2020, it became known that the Chinese Shanghai Zhizhen Network Technology Co., which owns a patent for a voice assistant in China, filed a lawsuit against Apple, demanding damages from the American company in the amount of 10 billion yuan ($1.43 billion) in connection with patent infringement. The voice assistant, a patent for which belongs to Shanghai Zhizhen Network Technology, also known as Xiao-i, has a technical architecture similar to Apple's Siri.

In June 2020, the Chinese Supreme Court ruled that the patent belongs to Xiao-i, thus putting an end to the proceedings that have lasted since 2012. Xiao-i said it has filed a lawsuit against Apple in a Shanghai court. Siri is used in Apple's iPhone and iPad, which Xiao-i believes violates its patent rights. The Chinese company is demanding Apple stop selling, manufacturing and using products that use technology that violates its patent. If Xiao-i wins in court, Apple could face a ban on the sale of many of its products to the PRC. China is Apple's second most sold market, second only to the United States^[19].

Telegram filed a complaint against Apple

On July 30, 2020, it became known messenger Telegram that he had filed an official antimonopoly complaint with the European Commission on Apple the fact of possible violations of competition rules in work. App Store More. here

The court overturned the decision of the European Commission to recover €13 billion from Apple

The European Court (the highest court of the Court of Justice of the European Union, whose decisions cannot be appealed) overturned^[20] decision^[21] the European Commission, which obliged the Irish authorities to recover €13 billion from Apple^[22].

In 2016, the European Commission admitted that the Irish authorities illegally provided two Apple subsidiaries - Apple Sales International (ASI) and Apple Operations Europe (AOE) - with tax breaks, which allowed them to sharply reduce income tax payments and save €13 billion. As a result, Apple, according to the European Commission, gained a significant advantage over other companies. EU members do not have the right to provide tax breaks to individual companies if they are not available to others, European Commissioner for Competition Margrethe Vestager said in 2016.

However, the European Court of Justice did not agree with the conclusions of the European Commission and annulled its decision.

"The court overturned the contested decision, as the European Commission failed to prove in accordance with legal standards the existence of advantages<...>. According to the court's decision, the Commission came to the wrong conclusion that ASI and AOE received an electoral economic advantage and, thus, support from the state," the press service of the European Court of Justice said.

According to the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, member states did not transfer tax powers to the Union. That is, all tax decisions should mainly be made by all member states unanimously, Alexander Zakharov, partner of Paragon Advice Group, explained to RBC.

"The EU court retained the sovereignty of member states in the field of tax policy, which now excludes arbitrary abuse by the European Commission of its powers in the field of protecting competition," the expert noted.

Apple fined 1.1 billion euros for price collusion with distributors

On March 16, 2020, the Competition Agency France (Autorité de laconcurrence) announced the imposition of Apple a fine of 1.1 billion euros for price collusion with distributors. This monetary penalty was a record for the French regulator.

The investigation into Apple began in 2012 with a filing by eBizcuss, which specializes in selling Apple products. This company was forced to close and blamed Apple for this.

The French competition agency (Autorité de laconcurrence) announced the imposition of a fine on Apple in the amount of 1.1 billion euros for price collusion with distributors

The investigation found that Apple unevenly supplied its products, including iPhones, to retailers, favoring wholesale suppliers Tech Data and Ingram Micro. At the same time, Apple did not allow independent partners to set discounts on products or hold any promotions with the participation of goods of the American manufacturer.

According to French authorities, Apple has colluded with IT distributors Tech Data and Ingram Micro. Those were also fined 76.1 and 62.9 million euros. As part of the investigation, several searches were carried out at Apple's offices in France, during which all documents were seized that helped identify the manifestation of unfair competition from Apple.

Apple and two wholesalers of its products agreed not to compete with each other and prevent competition among resellers, thus depriving the wholesale market of Apple products of competition, "said Isabel de Silva, head of the antimonopoly department.

On March 16, 2020, after the announcement of a fine for Apple, the company's shares fell by more than 13%.

A previous record €350m fine issued by the French antitrust authority was imposed on telecommunications company Orange SA in 2015. In 2019, the regulator fined Google 150 million euros for the "opaque" rules of the advertising service Google Ads.^[23]

Punishment for deliberately slowing down the iPhone

In early February 2020, a French consumer fraud group fined Apple €25 million for deliberately slowing down some older iPhone models with a software update in 2017. Read more here.

Apple, Broadcom to pay $1.1 billion to steal iPhone technology

At the end of January 2020, a Los Angeles court ruled that Apple and Broadcom would have to pay the California University of Technology (Caltech) a total of $1.1 billion for violating the rights to several patents owned by the educational institution. Read more here.

2019

Wine-free student demands $1 billion from Apple because its facial recognition system handed him over to the police

A student from New York through the court demands from Apple $1 billion for the fact that her facial recognition system falsely linked him to a series of robberies that took place in the company's stores. The student's name is Ousmane Bah, who is 18 years old, Bloomberg reports^[24].

He was arrested on November 29, 2018, at his home in New York, Ba said. He was charged in a series of robberies of Apple stores in Boston, New Jersey, Delaware and Manhattan. A photo was attached to the arrest warrant, but the person on it did not look like Ba, the plaintiff claims.

In addition, Ba has an alibi - one of the robberies he was accused of taking place in Boston on the very June day he partied at his prom in Manhattan. Goods worth $1.2 thousand were stolen from the Boston Apple store.

The plaintiff claims that some time ago he lost his student driver's license, which did not have a photo. Someone could steal or just find this document, and then use it to confirm their identity in the Apple store. Because of this, the student believes, Apple's facial recognition system could bring the robber's face into its base and sign it with Ba's name.

The plaintiff alleges that Apple uses a facial recognition system in stores to find visitors who are suspected of theft. At the same time, buyers do not know that their faces are scanned and analyzed. The detective investigating Ba personally reviewed the video from the cameras that captured the thief and was forced to admit that Ba did not look like him. It was the detective who told the student that the case could be in the facial recognition system and lost documents.

Due to a system error, Ba was forced to fight off numerous false accusations, which led to severe stress and other life difficulties, the lawsuit says. Not only Apple is listed as a defendant, but also Security Industry Specialists Inc., which provides security services. Read more here.

The court ordered Qualcomm to return Apple promised discounts of $1 billion

On March 14, 2019, the US District Court for the Southern District of California ordered Qualcomm to pay Apple $1 billion, which the American chipmaker promised to transfer to the iPhone manufacturer as a discount for the exclusive use of modem chips (used to connect phones to cellular networks). Read more here.

Lawsuit against Apple for 'illegally' including two-factor authentication

On February 11, 2019, it became known that California resident Jay Brodsky sued Apple for "illegally" enabling two-factor authentication. Brodsky complains that two-factor authentication makes life much more difficult for users, since they are required not only to remember the password, but also to have access to a trusted phone or phone number.

Several people have already been hurt by the two-factor authentication and continue to suffer damage, according to documents attached to the class action statement. As an example of damage, the plaintiffs cited financial losses associated with spending time on a long process of multi-stage authorization. According to the statement of claim, due to two-factor authentication, the authorization process takes from two to five minutes.

According to Brodsky, around September 2015, with the release of the next updates, Apple activated two-factor authentication by default, without implementing a mechanism that allows the user to disable it. Moreover, from the e-mail received by the user after enabling two-factor authentication, it does not become clear that the function is non-disconnectable.

The plaintiffs intend to force Apple to pay a fine under the "Fraud and computer Abuse Act." In addition, they demand an injunction and will seek "all the funds, income and benefits" that Apple "unfairly received" from including two-factor authentication (what kind of benefits are in question, the lawsuit does not specify)^[25]

2018

Apple stops selling iPhone 7 and 8 in Germany by court order

On December 20, 2018, Apple announced the termination of sales of the iPhone 7 and iPhone 8 in Germany, thereby complying with the requirement of the Munich District Court. He found the company guilty of violating Qualcomm's patent. Read more here.

Apple and Samsung fined €15m for deliberately slowing down smartphones

On October 24, 2018, the antimonopoly authority Italy (Autorità Garante dellaConcorrenza e del Mercato, AGCM) announced the imposition of a fine on Apple Samsung and a total of 15 million euros for deliberately slowing down work. smartphones More. here

Apple will pay $145 million for technology theft

On August 1, 2018, a federal jury in California ruled that Apple would have to pay $145.1 million to Canadian company WiLan for patent infringement. This was reported by the Reuters news agency with reference to the court's decision.

A San Diego court ruled that Apple illegally used wireless technologies in smartphones (starting with the iPhone 6 in 2014), which are patented by WiLan. We are talking about patents registered under numbers 8457145 and 8537757.

A jury in California ruled that Apple will have to pay $145.1 million to Canadian company WiLan for patent infringement

One of the documents describes "a method and equipment for creating protocols for requesting the bandwidth of a wireless communication system." Another patent deals with "adaptive call access control for use in a wireless communication system."

Founded in 1992, WiLan was initially engaged in the development of technology in the field of wireless broadband, but over time the company focused on selling licenses for its numerous patents. For its activities, WiLan is often called a "patent troll" - a company that does not develop or produce goods, but receives income from the sale of patent licenses. WiLan itself calls itself "one of the most successful patent licensing companies in the world."

WiLan has been suing Apple for a long time, but before that, the court sided with the iPhone manufacturer. So, in 2013, WiLan tried to recover $248 million from Apple, but the attempt was unsuccessful. The history of litigation between Apple and WiLan began in 2007. Then WiLan claimed that Apple was illegally using its Wi-Fi patents. Three years later, a similar statement was made about Bluetooth technology.^[26]

2017

Nokia $2 billion fee for patent dispute settlement

At the end of July 2017, it became known how much Apple paid Nokia to resolve the conflict, which was announced two months earlier.

Nokia's financial report for the second quarter of 2017 refers to a certain "advance cash payment" of 1.7 billion euros (about $2 billion). A representative of the Finnish company told the Nokiamob portal that this is a deduction from Apple. It is worth noting that this payment is a one-time payment, but it is known that Apple will pay Nokia for several more years under the terms of the license agreement. The total amount of payments is not called.

Apple paid Nokia $2 billion to resolve the conflict

At the end of 2016, Nokia filed lawsuits against Apple in several courts, including German and American. The Finnish telecommunications equipment maker alleged that Apple violated 32 patents that relate to various elements of mobile devices, including the display, user interface, video encoding and antenna.

Nokia's move was a response to Apple's antitrust lawsuit, in which an American corporation accused an opponent and several other companies of illegally transferring patents in order to extort excessive patent payments. In May 2017, all claims were withdrawn.

Then the financial component of the contract was not disclosed. It was only reported that we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars that Nokia will receive in the form of an advance payment and additional deductions during the term of the licensing agreement.

Thanks to the deal with Apple, the revenue of Nokia Technologies, a division specializing in patent licensing and consumer electronics development, increased by 90% in the second quarter of 2017 compared to the same period in 2016, but profit in the structure decreased due to legal costs and Nokia's large expenses for the development of the medical business.^[27]

Fine of $500 million for patent infringement

On July 26, 2017, an American court ordered Apple to pay compensation in the amount of more than $500 million for violating a patent owned by the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The amount of the fine almost doubled compared to the one that the jury insisted on two years earlier.

The stumbling block was a patent describing a technology for predicting the actions of device users, thanks to which processor performance and energy efficiency are improved. Apple used this development in its single-chip systems for the iPhone and iPad. The patent was registered by University of Wisconsin computer science professor Gurindar Soh and his students in 1998.

Apple fined $0.5 billion for plagiarizing technology

The University of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) sued Apple in 2014. A year later, another lawsuit was filed that involved patent infringement in more modern Apple processors. The plaintiff demanded damages in the amount of $400 million, but in October 2015 a jury ordered a fine of $234 million.

Apple tried to appeal this decision, but on July 26, 2017, District Judge William Conley in Madison not only sided with the accusing party, but also increased the amount of compensation in favor of WARF by $272 million. Thus, Apple will have to pay $506 million. According to Conley, the specified amount of recovery includes interest and damage incurred by the plaintiff, since Apple continued to use patented processor technology until the expiration of the patent in December 2016.

Apple from the very beginning denied its guilt and insisted on the invalidity of the patent in question. The company applied to the US Patent and Trademark Office with a request to revise the patent, but was refused. It is worth recalling that the University of Wisconsin sued Intel under this patent and eventually entered into a settlement agreement with the IT giant.^[28]

2010: Suppliers charged with infringing dozens of patents

In July 2010, Apple sued several of its suppliers, accusing them of violating ten of its patents and trademark protection law. Apple is concerned about the quality of the products produced by these companies, as it negatively affects its brand.

2008: Lawsuit from user over overstated communication speed data

In 2008, a resident of Alabama, USA, sued Apple, accusing the company of dishonest advertising, which claimed that the iPhone 3G had one communication speed, and in fact it turned out to be much lower. In a ten-page application filed in US District Court in North Alabama, Jessica Smith argued that Apple misled its buyers and the income it received from the sale of phones was thus unfair.

2007: Lawsuit from user over inability to replace battery

iPhone phones have been criticized by users. So in 2007, in the district court of Illinois, USA, a certain Jose Trujillo filed a lawsuit against Apple and AT & T. In his statement of claim, he claimed that at the time of the purchase, the iPhone had no idea that its battery could not be replaced on its own and that this fact was hidden not only from him, but from all other buyers who purchased the iPhone. In addition, according to him, the phone's battery must be replaced not after 400 recharging cycles, but after 300, which obliges buyers to carry out its paid replacement once a year, despite the fact that the procedure costs about $90.

2006

Trial with Apple Corps

In 2006, Apple Corps, representing The Beatles, sued Apple Computers. Dissatisfaction with Apple Corps was caused by the activities of the iTunes online store. According to representatives of Apple Corps, iTunes violated the 1991 agreement by its activities, according to which Apple Computers did not have the right to distribute music.

Payment of $100 million to Creative for patent infringement

In 2006, Creative Technology sued Apple for violating patent laws that allegedly occurred when creating iPods. Creative argued that the navigation menu used to find and play music in the iPod violates the patent for the company's MP3 player Zen. Then the court decided to oblige Apple to pay a competitor $100 million.

Trial with user due to iPod's hearing risks

Often, the object of attacks was the produced Apple player - the iPod. In 2006, Louisiana resident John Patterson sued Apple Computers, claiming that the player produced by this company causes hearing impairment. In its lawsuit, the American said that the manufacturers of the iPod player "do not warn buyers that the device can have a harmful effect on their hearing." The complaint also indicated that iPod players maintain a sound volume of 115 decibels, and the influence of the sound of such a volume is safe for a person's hearing, allegedly only when exposed to the eardrums for no more than 28 seconds a day.

1989: Fine in favour of the Beatles and ban on music files

In 1989, a trial followed, following which Apple Computer was ordered to pay Apple Corps, representing the interests of The Beatles in the recording market, $26.5 million. In addition to the fine, restrictions were imposed on the functionality of Macintosh computers: Apple machines could play and edit music files, but could not create them.

1980 Trial with the company of The Beatles because of the name

In 1980, Apple Corps, representing The Beatles in the recording market since 1968, and Apple Computers met in court over the names of the companies. Then an agreement was reached with the condition that Apple Computer would not be engaged in the music business.

Notes