In re iPhone Application Litigation

Apple, Inc. (defendant) manufactured the iPhone. The iPhone software collected personal data from apps used on the phones without the users’ knowledge or consent. The iPhone also had a location-services feature that allowed Apple to collect a user’s personal-location data. There was an option to turn off the location-services feature, but, for a period of time, a bug in the software caused the phones to collect and transmit some location data to Apple even when this feature was turned off. Cameron Dwyer, Anthony Chiu, Alejandro Capiro, and Isabella Capiro (the users) (plaintiffs) filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Apple for violating California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) and Unfair Competition Law (UCL). The users alleged that Apple had made misrepresentations in its privacy policy that (1) iPhone users’ data would be kept private and (2) turning off the location-services feature meant that location data would not be transmitted to Apple. The users claimed that they had been harmed by these misrepresentations because (1) the users had paid more for the iPhones than they would have paid had they known the truth and (2) both types of data collection taxed the users’ iPhone batteries, bandwidth, and phone storage. However, none of the users had read any of Apple’s polices or heard or read any representations from Apple before obtaining their iPhones. At most, after the phones had already been purchased, (1) Chiu read a disclosure agreement while setting up an iTunes account on his phone and (2) an Apple employee told Isabella that she could turn off the location-services feature on her phone, even though the software bug prevented that statement from being completely true at the time it was made. Apple moved for summary judgment, arguing that the users had failed to establish either the injury or causation needed to have standing to pursue the lawsuit.