Apple Denied Motion to Dismiss Lawsuit Related to Disabling FaceTime on iOS 6 and Earlier

United States district judge Lucy Koh has denied Apple's motion to dismiss a lawsuit related to disabling FaceTime on iOS 6 and earlier software versions three years ago, allowing the case to proceed as a class action lawsuit. MacRumors obtained court documents of the opinion filed electronically.

iPhone 4 FaceTime
The lawsuit was filed in February by California resident and iPhone 4 owner Christina Grace, who claims Apple intentionally broke FaceTime on iOS 6 and earlier by disabling a digital certificate that caused the service to cease functioning. California resident Ken Patter was later named as a second plaintiff.

FaceTime abruptly stopped functioning for all iOS 6 users in April 2014. At the time, a spokesperson for Apple said devices may have encountered a "bug" resulting from a device certificate that expired on that date, and the company advised affected users to update to iOS 7 to fix the issue.

The lawsuit, however, alleges that Apple intentionally broke FaceTime, prioritizing its financial interests over its customers.

Apple used two connection methods when launching FaceTime in 2010: a peer-to-peer method that created a direct connection between two iPhones, allegedly used between 90 and 95 percent of the time, and a relay method that used data servers from content delivery network company Akamai Technologies.

Apple's peer-to-peer FaceTime technology was found to infringe on VirnetX's patents in 2012, however, so the company began to shift toward the relay method, which used Akamai's servers. Within a year, Apple was paying $50 million in fees to Akamai, according to testimony from the VirnetX trial.

Apple eventually solved the problem by creating new peer-to-peer technology that would debut in iOS 7 in September 2013. But not all users upgraded and, seven months later, the lawsuit alleges that Apple intentionally broke FaceTime on iOS 6 and earlier to stop paying millions of dollars per month to Akamai.

Testimony from Apple's 2016 retrial with VirnetX indicated that, between April 2013 and September 2013 alone, Apple paid approximately $50 million as a result of FaceTime functioning in relay mode only on iOS 6 and earlier.

Updating to iOS 7 could be seen as the simple solution in this situation. But the plaintiffs owned an iPhone 4 and iPhone 4s, and cited internet articles that claim updating to iOS 7 significantly impairs the performance and functionality of those smartphones. Their complaint also cited Bluetooth and Wi-Fi issues.

In its now-denied motion to dismiss, one of Apple's arguments was that the plaintiffs have no right to uninterrupted, continuous, or error-free FaceTime service under the terms of its iOS Software License Agreement. Apple also said the plaintiffs didn't experience the iOS 7 issues mentioned on their own iPhones.

The class action lawsuit would apply to all iPhone 4 or iPhone 4s owners in the United States who, on April 16, 2014, had iOS 6 or an earlier version of the operating system installed on that device. The plaintiffs claim Apple's actions violate California's Unfair Competition Law and are seeking a jury trial.

Popular Stories

maxresdefault

Apple Shows Off a Key Reason to Upgrade to the iPhone 17

Saturday February 7, 2026 9:26 am PST by
Apple today shared an ad that shows how the upgraded Center Stage front camera on the latest iPhones improves the process of taking a group selfie. "Watch how the new front facing camera on iPhone 17 Pro takes group selfies that automatically expand and rotate as more people come into frame," says Apple. While the ad is focused on the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max, the regular iPhone...
apple wallet drivers license feature iPhone 15 pro

Apple Says These 7 U.S. States Plan to Offer iPhone Driver's Licenses

Monday February 9, 2026 6:24 am PST by
In select U.S. states, residents can add their driver's license or state ID to the Apple Wallet app on the iPhone and Apple Watch, and then use it to display proof of identity or age at select airports and businesses, and in select apps. The feature is currently available in 13 U.S. states and Puerto Rico, and it is expected to launch in at least seven more in the future. To set up the...
14 inch MacBook Pro Keyboard

New MacBook Pros Could Now Arrive in March

Sunday February 8, 2026 6:02 am PST by
New MacBook Pro models with the M5 Pro and M5 Max chips could arrive as soon as Monday, March 2, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. In today's "Power On" newsletter, Gurman said that the release of new MacBook Pro models is tied to the release of macOS Tahoe 26.3. The launch is said to be slated for as early as the week of March 2. He added that the M4 Pro and M4 Max models on sale today...
wwdc sans text feature

Apple Rumored to Announce New Product on February 19

Thursday February 5, 2026 12:22 pm PST by
Apple plans to announce the iPhone 17e on Thursday, February 19, according to Macwelt, the German equivalent of Macworld. The report, citing industry sources, is available in English on Macworld. Apple announced the iPhone 16e on Wednesday, February 19 last year, so the iPhone 17e would be unveiled exactly one year later if this rumor is accurate. It is quite uncommon for Apple to unveil...
Apple Logo Zoomed

Apple Expected to Launch These 10+ Products Over the Coming Months

Tuesday February 10, 2026 6:33 am PST by
It has been a slow start to 2026 for Apple product launches, with only a new AirTag and a special Apple Watch band released so far. We are still waiting for MacBook Pro models with M5 Pro and M5 Max chips, the iPhone 17e, a lower-cost MacBook with an iPhone chip, long-rumored updates to the Apple TV and HomePod mini, and much more. Apple is expected to release/update the following products...

Top Rated Comments

Wowereit Avatar
111 months ago
So people are suing over something they could've fixed themselves by upgrading, but because they felt like not doing so they want to get money from Apple?


Don't get me wrong, there have been legitimate law suits against Apple, but at this point it has become ridiculous. Apparently everybody wants a piece of the cake now.
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)
locoboi187 Avatar
111 months ago
I'm going to play devil's advocate here. If you buy a product with a feature advertised as working on a device with the sold firmware, you should expect it to work and not be disabled by the manufacturer.
Score: 17 Votes (Like | Disagree)
826317 Avatar
111 months ago
This is the most American thing I've seen all this year. Suing a large corporation because your outdated choice of iOS doesn't support an app anymore......How pathetic can it get..
Score: 16 Votes (Like | Disagree)
drewyboy Avatar
111 months ago
This has to be one of the few completely valid lawsuits against Apple. So many people defending Apple right off the bat simply don't understand that under an iOS6 update, Facetime functionality was REMOVED due to the cost of the relay. It was re-introduced with Apples peer-to-peer fix in iOS7, but having had an iPhone4, upgrading to iOS7 was a HUGE mistake. Made my phone pretty unusable and it didn't get any better with iOS7.1 but of course you can't downgrade at that point.

People need to stop and actually read the article not only here, but on other sites that give the full story to really gauge what's going on, but of course that's asking many people to do something that's hard for most, critical thinking.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
justperry Avatar
111 months ago
My conclusion...software patents shouldn't exist.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Saipher Avatar
111 months ago


The lawsuit, however, alleges that Apple intentionally broke FaceTime, prioritizing its financial interests over its customers.

Come on, Apple would never do such a thing... /s
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)