Florida Court Dismisses Lawsuit Claiming Apple 'Broke' FaceTime on Older iPhones to Save Costs - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Florida Court Dismisses Lawsuit Claiming Apple 'Broke' FaceTime on Older iPhones to Save Costs

A court in Florida has dismissed a consumer lawsuit alleging that Apple intentionally "broke" FaceTime on older iPhones as a cost-saving measure (via Bloomberg Law).

facetime e1486093308787
In 2017, a similar class-action lawsuit was brought against Apple in California that claimed Apple broke ‌FaceTime‌ in iOS 6 to force users to upgrade to iOS 7. According to the lawsuit, Apple forced users to upgrade so it could avoid payments on a data deal with Akamai.

Apple agreed in February to settle the lawsuit in California, but the federal court in the Florida case ruled on Tuesday that the claims against Apple did not meet timeliness requirements. According to U.S. District Court Judge Raag Singhal, the complainants had several chances to file suit against Apple, but didn't lodge their complaint until August 2019.

Apple used two connection methods when it launched ‌FaceTime‌ in 2010: a peer-to-peer method that created a direct connection between two iPhones, 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. The class-action lawsuits, however, alleged that Apple created a fake bug that caused a digital certificate to prematurely expire on April 16, 2014, breaking ‌FaceTime‌ on iOS 6.

The lawsuits claimed that breaking ‌FaceTime‌ in iOS 6 allowed Apple to save money because it would no longer need to support users who did not upgrade to iOS 7.

Popular Stories

iphone 16 teal

Apple's Siri Settlement: Here's When iPhone Owners Can Submit Claims

Friday August 28, 2026 11:01 am PDT by
In May, Apple agreed to pay $250 million to settle a U.S. class action lawsuit over Siri AI's delayed launch, and eligible iPhone users could receive up to a $95 payout. Today, a new court document revealed when customers will likely be able to begin submitting claims. If the dates proposed by Apple's lawyers are approved by the judge, eligible customers would begin to be notified about the...
OpenAI vs Apple Feature

Dispute With OpenAI Said to Be a 'Mess of Apple's Own Making'

Tuesday September 1, 2026 5:06 am PDT by
OpenAI yesterday denied Apple's allegations of trade secret theft, telling a federal court that Apple failed to show any confidential information was actually stolen by its former employees, according to Reuters. In a new filing submitted to the U.S. District Court in San Jose, California, OpenAI argued that the dispute is "a mess of Apple's own making." The filing is a direct response to...
generic tracking prompt orange

Apple Hit With $2.7 Billion Lawsuit Over App Tracking Rules

Thursday September 3, 2026 7:46 am PDT by
Apple is facing a £2 billion ($2.7 billion) lawsuit in London accusing it of imposing stricter App Tracking Transparency rules on third party developers than on its own advertising services (via Reuters). The case, filed at London's Competition Appeal Tribunal, follows a similar suit in which the tribunal ordered Apple to pay around £1.5 billion over App Store commissions last October, a...

Top Rated Comments

84 months ago

Doesn’t matter what the courts say. It was planned obsolescence just like the throttlegate fiasco.
I always find it funny when people link that to planned obsolescence. What Apple did was the opposite of planned obsolescence. Keeping your phone running longer without shutting down randomly means your phone would last longer.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago
The bit I don’t get is even if Apple did do this to avoid costs, what’s wrong with that?

There was no guarantee offered That FaceTime would last forever. It’s similar to how old game servers get turned off years after a game is released so certain features stop working.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago

I pray every day that Apple restores the iOS 6 look.
*vomits skeuomorphically*
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
BvizioN Avatar
84 months ago

Doesn’t matter what the courts say. It was planned obsolescence just like the throttlegate fiasco.
I get it.
It doesn't matter what the court says when it doesn't suit your personal believes.


I pray every day that Apple restores the iOS 6 look. I do agree with the lawsuit. Many people did not upgrade because of the horrible iOS 7 look and were out face time.
I have absolutely no idea why anyone would want to go backwards (like nearly a decade), but I keep telling myself, people are weird!
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
mazz0 Avatar
84 months ago
Well not really, there's been no demonstration either way on whether Apple did what it's accused of or not. The case has only been dismissed on a technicality.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago
good. it was a frivolous lawsuit anyways
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)