Consumer rights group Which? is suing Apple for £3bn over the way it deploys the iCloud.
If the lawsuit succeeds, around 40 million Apple customers in the UK could be entitled to a payout.
The lawsuit claims Apple, which controls iOS operating systems, has breached UK competition law by giving its iCloud storage preferential treatment, effectively “trapping” customers with Apple devices into using it.
It also claims the company overcharged those customers by stifling competition.
The rights group alleges Apple encouraged users to sign up to iCloud for storage of photos, videos and other data while simultaneously making it difficult to use alternative providers.
Which? says Apple doesn’t allow customers to store or back-up all of their phone’s data with a third-party provider, arguing this violates competition law.
The consumer rights group says once iOS users have signed up to iCloud, they then have to pay for the service once their photos, notes, messages and other data go over the free 5GB limit.
More on Apple
Related Topics:
“By bringing this claim, Which? is showing big corporations like Apple that they cannot rip off UK consumers without facing repercussions,” said Which?’s chief executive Anabel Hoult.
“Taking this legal action means we can help consumers to get the redress that they are owed, deter similar behaviour in the future and create a better, more competitive market.”
Advertisement
Apple ‘rejects’ claims and will defend itself
Apple “rejects” the idea its customers are tied to using iCloud and told Sky News it would “vigorously” defend itself.
“Apple believes in providing our customers with choices,” a spokesperson said.
“Our users are not required to use iCloud, and many rely on a wide range of third-party alternatives for data storage. In addition, we work hard to make data transfer as easy as possible – whether it’s to iCloud or another service.
“We reject any suggestion that our iCloud practices are anti-competitive and will vigorously defend against any legal claim otherwise.”
It also said nearly half of its customers don’t use iCloud and its pricing is inline with other cloud storage providers.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
How much could UK Apple customers receive if lawsuit succeeds?
The lawsuit will represent all UK Apple customers that have used iCloud services since 1 October 2015 – any that don’t want to be included will need to opt out.
However, if consumers live abroad but are otherwise eligible – for example because they lived in UK and used the iCloud but then moved away – they can also opt in.
The consumer rights group estimates that individual consumers could be owed an average of £70, depending on how long they have been paying for the services during that period.
Apple is facing a similar lawsuit in the US, where the US Department of Justice is accusing the company of locking down its iPhone ecosystem to build a monopoly.
Apple said the lawsuit is “wrong on the facts and the law” and that it will vigorously defend against it.
And in December last year, a judge declared Google’s Android app store a monopoly in a case brought by a private gaming company.
“Now that five companies control the whole of the internet economy, there’s a real need for people to fight back and to really put pressure on the government,” William Fitzgerald, from tech campaigning organisation The Worker Agency, told Sky News.
“That’s why we have governments; to hold corporations accountable, to actually enforce laws.”
The UK is on a “slippery slope towards death on demand”, according to the justice secretary ahead of a historic Commons vote on assisted dying.
In a letter to her constituents, Shabana Mahmood said she was “profoundly concerned” about the legislation.
“Sadly, recent scandals – such as Hillsborough, infected blood and the Post Office Horizon – have reminded us that the state and those acting on its behalf are not always benign,” she wrote.
“I have always held the view that, for this reason, the state should serve a clear role. It should protect and preserve life, not take it away.
“The state should never offer death as a service.”
On 29 November, MPs will be asked to consider whether to legalise assisted dying, through Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
14:46
Minister ‘leans’ to assisted dying bill
Details of the legislation were published last week, including confirmation the medicine that will end a patient’s life will need to be self-administered and people must be terminally ill and expected to die within six months.
Ms Mahmood, however, said “predictions about life expectancy are often inaccurate”.
Advertisement
“Doctors can only predict a date of death, with any real certainty, in the final days of life,” she said. “The judgment as to who can and cannot be considered for assisted suicide will therefore be subjective and imprecise.”
Under the Labour MP’s proposals, two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge must give their approval.
The bill will also include punishments of up to 14 years in prison for those who break the law, including coercing someone into ending their own life.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
However, Ms Mahmood said she was concerned the legislation could “pressure” some into ending their lives.
“It cannot be overstated what a profound shift in our culture assisted suicide will herald,” she wrote.
“In my view, the greatest risk of all is the pressure the elderly, vulnerable, sick or disabled may place upon themselves.”
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who put forward the bill, said some of the points Ms Mahmood raised have been answered “in the the thorough drafting and presentation of the bill”.
“The strict eligibility criteria make it very clear that we are only talking about people who are already dying,” she said.
“That is why the bill is called the ‘Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill’; its scope cannot be changed and clearly does not include any other group of people.
“The bill would give dying people the autonomy, dignity and choice to shorten their death if they wish.”
In response to concerns Ms Mahmood raised about patients being coerced into choosing assisted death, Ms Leadbeater said she has consulted widely with doctors and judges.
“Those I have spoken to tell me that they are well equipped to ask the right questions to detect coercion and to ascertain a person’s genuine wishes. It is an integral part of their work,” she said.
In an increasingly fractious debate around the topic, multiple Labour MPs have voiced their concerns.
In a letter to ministers on 3 October, the Cabinet Secretary Simon Case confirmed “the Prime Minister has decided to set aside collective responsibility on the merits of this bill” and that the government would “therefore remain neutral on the passage of the Bill and on the matter of assisted dying”.
“Immediate action” is being taken after blueprints of jail layouts were shared online.
The maps detailing the layouts of prisons in England and Wales were leaked on the dark web over the past fortnight, according to The Times.
The detailed information is said to include the locations of cameras and sensors, prompting fears they could be used to smuggle drugs or weapons into prisons or help inmates plan escapes.
Security officials are now working to identify the source of the leak and who might benefit from the details.
The Ministry of Justice did not disclose which prisons were involved in the breach.
A government spokesperson said in a statement: “We are not going to comment on the specific detail of security matters of this kind, but we are aware of a breach of data to the prison estate and, like with all potential breaches, have taken immediate action to ensure prisons remain secure.”
The leak comes amid a chronic prison overcrowding crisis, which has led to early release schemes and the re-categorising of the security risks of some offenders to ease capacity pressures.
The UK will “set out a path” to lift defence spending to 2.5% of national income in the spring, the prime minister has said, finally offering a timeframe for an announcement on the long-awaited hike after mounting criticism.
Sir Keir Starmer gave the date during a phone call with Mark Rutte, the secretary general of NATO, in the wake of threats by Moscow to target UK and US military facilities following a decision by London and Washington to let Ukraine fire their missiles inside Russia.
There was no clarity though on when the 2.5% level will be achieved. The UK says it currently spends around 2.3% of GDP on defence.
A spokeswoman for Downing Street said that the two men “began by discussing the situation in Ukraine and reiterated the importance of putting the country in the strongest possible position going into the winter”.
They also talked about the deployment of thousands of North Korean soldiers to fight alongside Russia.
“The prime minister underscored the need for all NATO countries to step up in support of our collective defence and updated on the government’s progress on the strategic defence review,” the spokeswoman said.
“His government would set out the path to 2.5% in the spring.”
The defence review will also be published in the spring.
While a date for an announcement on 2.5% will be welcomed by the Ministry of Defence, analysts have long warned that such an increase is still well below the amount that is needed to rebuild the armed forces after decades of decline to meet growing global threats from Russia, an increasingly assertive China, North Korea and Iran.
They say the UK needs to be aiming to hit at least 3% – probably higher.
With Donald Trump returning to the White House, there will be significantly more pressure on the UK and other European NATO allies to accelerate increases in defence spending.