Apple Faces £3 Billion UK Trial Over iCloud Lock-In Claims - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Apple Faces £3 Billion UK Trial Over iCloud Lock-In Claims

Apple was not able to narrow the scope of a UK lawsuit accusing it of locking 40 million UK consumers into iCloud, to the detriment of third-party cloud storage providers. British consumer group Which? first filed the lawsuit in late 2024, and is asking for £3 billion for UK Apple customers.

iCloud General Feature
Apple wanted to exclude non-paying ‌iCloud‌ users from the lawsuit, but the tribunal denied Apple's request in a 2 to 1 majority. The lawsuit will go to trial, and will cover both paying and non-paying ‌iCloud‌ customers.

Apple users get 5GB of free storage for photos, messages, and other content on the iPhone, but are encouraged to subscribe to Apple's higher-tier ‌iCloud‌ storage options when the 5GB limit is exceeded. Which? claims that Apple favors its own cloud storage option, and makes it difficult for customers to use alternative cloud storage providers.

Which? sued Apple on behalf of all Apple ‌iCloud‌ users in the UK, regardless of whether they pay for an ‌iCloud‌ subscription plan. Normally, a customer that has not lost anything would not be eligible for a damages payment, but Which? has taken a unique approach.

The tribunal said the lawsuit raises a "novel" legal question, because it is not aware of another case where damages have been requested for "forgone consumer surplus." Forgone Consumer Surplus (FCS) is a legal theory that in this case argues people who were priced out of an ‌iCloud‌ subscription because of Apple's alleged market abuse have suffered a tangible loss because they did not have the opportunity to buy a service they wanted at a fair price in a competitive market.

The 200GB ‌iCloud‌ tier that costs £2.99 might have only cost £1.99 at a "fair" price, for example. Which? argues that a customer who would have theoretically paid £1.99 for the service but was not able to do so because the actual £2.99 price was unaffordable suffered a £1 loss, even though the customer paid nothing. Lawsuits for damages are usually more straightforward, covering paying customers who experienced clear harm from inflated pricing.

While two members of the tribunal sided with Which?, the other took Apple's side. The justice who argued against FCS warned that the case could lead to a flood of cases with secondary claims from non-purchasers based on hypothetical willingness-to-pay calculations.

Apple owes no damages at this point, and is now facing a trial to determine whether it abused its position and gave ‌iCloud‌ preferential treatment on iOS.

All UK consumers who are eligible are automatically included in the claim unless they opt out. Eligible consumers include those who obtained ‌iCloud‌ services from November 8, 2018, to the present. Which? estimates that Apple could owe UK customers an average payout of £70.

Which? wants Apple to settle the claim without litigation by offering consumers their money back and opening up iOS to let users choose a cloud provider.

Popular Stories

iOS 26

iOS 26.4.1 Includes These Two Changes for iPhones

Wednesday April 8, 2026 7:17 pm PDT by
Apple has released a minor iOS 26.4.1 update for the iPhone 11 and newer. While the release notes for the update only mention unspecified "bug fixes," we have since learned about two specific changes that are included in it. First, 9to5Mac spotted an Apple Developer Forums thread suggesting that iOS 26.4.1 fixes an iOS 26.4 bug that affected iCloud syncing in some apps. Second, an...
london marathon apple watch

Apple to Host Free Events in London Ahead of April 26 Marathon

Wednesday April 15, 2026 7:29 am PDT by
Apple today announced a series of events tied to this year's TCS London Marathon, with the company serving as an official partner of the race. The TCS London Marathon is one of the world's most popular marathons and takes place on Sunday, April 26, drawing athletes of all abilities from around the world. A record-breaking one million people applied to enter the ballot for the 2026 event....
Apple Event Logo

Apple Just Released a New Accessory

Monday May 4, 2026 8:13 am PDT by
Apple today released a new Pride Edition Sport Loop for the Apple Watch. The band features a rainbow design with 11 colors of woven nylon yarns. The new Pride Edition Sport Loop is available to order now on Apple.com and in the Apple Store app in 40mm, 42mm, and 46mm sizes, and it will be available at Apple Store locations starting later this week. In the U.S., the band costs $49. There...

Top Rated Comments

baryon Avatar
8 hours ago at 02:17 pm
I just wish I could use my own NAS instead of iCloud to store my photos library and have it be integrated with Photos on Mac and iPhone, so that photos get uploaded automatically and appear on all devices.
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
drunkaviator Avatar
9 hours ago at 02:06 pm
As a Brit, I couldn't care less. All cloud storage costs about the same, whether it's Google, Microsoft or Apple, a few quid a month isn't a big deal. Not sure how an encrypted backup is supposed to work with a third party service either. I wouldn't want my backups anywhere else but iCloud. Not to be an apple defender, but of all the possible lawsuits, I don't get this one.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)
turbineseaplane Avatar
9 hours ago at 02:07 pm
We need an entire forum subsection for legal action against Apple.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
MichaelOverton Avatar
8 hours ago at 02:37 pm
Honestly, who cares. It's Apple's product. They built it, they took the risk, they own the thing top to bottom. If they want iCloud to be the default and only cloud backup option on iOS, that's their call to make.

The consumer has a choice. It's called not buying an iPhone.

Nobody's forced into the ecosystem. You walk into the shop knowing exactly what Apple is. The walled garden isn't hidden, it's half the reason people buy in. And £2.99 for 200GB isn't extortion, it's roughly what Google and Microsoft charge for the same thing.

Where do we stop with this logic anyway? HP locks you into their ink cartridges and actively bricks third-party ones with firmware updates. Nespresso wants you buying their pods. Games consoles take a cut on every game sold. Every John Deere tractor is a fight to repair with non-official parts. The whole consumer electronics industry runs on aftermarket lock-in. Picking on Apple for iCloud while ignoring all of that feels less like principled competition law and more like going after the biggest name in the room.

The idea that a court should now decide what the "fair" price of iCloud should have been, and hand out damages to people who never even paid for it because they hypothetically might have if it were cheaper, is a bit mad when you say it out loud.

Don't like how Apple does things? Buy a Pixel. That's how markets are supposed to work.
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
northernmunky Avatar
8 hours ago at 02:31 pm
Also Brit here, I dont get this at all. I'm under no obligation to be on iCloud, I can just sync with my laptop if I want, I can download all my images if I want. Sure I've been paying 99p a month because it happens to be cheap and convenient purely for my apple stuff but even then I know how to cancel it and pull my data, and I remove my photos when it gets full. I have other cloud providers for my other stuff.

I don't see how I'm apparently 'locked in'? I'm not sure I see them winning this.
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
8 hours ago at 02:30 pm
I would like Windows but without all the Microsoft bloat and Microsoft upselling.
I would like to own a Playstation that can also be allowed to install Steam and play Xbox games.
I would like to buy an app or game for one platform and have that same app/game available to all platforms so I can switch platforms easily.
I would like a YouTube TV service where I only pay for certain channels so my bill won't be that high.
I would like to use Whoop wristband, but without paying a monthly fee.
I would like DMs/video chats/file sharing from all social media and messaging platforms to adopt a universal standard so I can talk with others that aren't using my social network provider/messaging platform.

and so on.

But I would never ask to make it a law because that would be ****ing stupid. Instead, I vote with my wallet because I have common sense.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)