CesiumAstro alleges in a newly filed lawsuit that a former executive disclosed trade secrets and confidential information about sensitive tech, investors, and customers to a competing startup.
Austin-based Cesium develops active phased array and software-defined radio systems for spacecraft, missiles, and drones.
But the suit says that Luther maintained “personal connections” with AnySignal’s cofounders, having worked with AnySignal CEO John Malsbury previously at a different company.
This resulted in AnySignal “recruiting and inducing Luther … to improperly disclose” the confidential and trade secret information, the suit says.
The suit was filed in Western District of Texas under no.
Indeed, with numbers hovering around 20% globally, it’s difficult to make the case that the company is dominating the competition the way Microsoft did Apple a quarter-century ago.
Apple suggests, however, that the DOJ’s suggestion that its “share of the entire U.S. smartphone market exceeds 65%” is misleading, as it refers to revenue rather than units sold.
It’s here the DOJ suggests that Apple commands 70% of the “performance” smartphone market.
Today, only Samsung and Google remain as meaningful competitors in the U.S. performance smartphone market.
Even Cupertino’s highly paid legal team would struggle to make the case that Apple Watch owners aren’t hamstrung by its iOS exclusivity.
Apple is dubbing the litigation misguided and warning the DOJ risks trashing all the things its customers value about its integrated mobile ecosystem.
In an on-the-record statement provided to TechCrunch, Apple said:This lawsuit threatens who we are and the principles that set Apple products apart in fiercely competitive markets.
The suit claims Apple holds a more than 70% share of “performance smartphones” and over 65% of the US smartphone market, respectively.
But they are also aggressively briefing that the DOJ case will fail.
In today’s briefing Apple also claimed the DOJ’s case has changed tack multiple times (it suggests at least six) over the four years it’s been in formulation.
But one category in particular caught our attention as the DOJ spends quite a bit of time talking about “green bubbles” and “blue bubbles.”When an iPhone user sends a message to another iPhone user, by default that message is sent using Apple’s iMessage protocol.
If an iPhone user texts an Android user — and vice versa — iOS falls back to the older, less secure but universal SMS protocol.
“Apple makes third-party messaging apps on the iPhone worse generally and relative to Apple Messages, Apple’s own messaging app,” the DOJ wrote in its lawsuit.
At this point, you might think: wasn’t the RCS protocol supposed to level up SMS messaging and alleviate these pain points?
It feels a bit odd that the DOJ is front-loading its antitrust lawsuit against Apple with the much talked about “green bubbles” vs. “blue bubbles” debate as there are far more serious and substantive issues.
The Coalition for App Fairness (CAF) released a statement on Thursday cheering on the Department of Justice’s antitrust lawsuit against Apple.
The group includes a number of key app makers, including Epic Games, Spotify, Deezer, Match Group, Proton and others.
In 2020, Epic made it possible for Fortnite players to pay Epic directly, rather than giving a cut to Apple.
Then, Apple removed Epic from the App Store, which sparked a slew of legal proceedings.
In a statement, Apple said: “This lawsuit threatens who we are and the principles that set Apple products apart in fiercely competitive markets.
The Apple Watch gets some face time in the filing, as well.
The suit rightly notes that the Apple Watch is “only compatible with the iPhone” – a longstanding complaint among Android users interested in picking up what is far and away the market share leader.
Apple is not, however, alone in ensuring that certain functionality only operates as stated with first-party hardware, however.
The Apple Watch has historically been even more dominant in its respective category than the iPhone in the global market.
Should the DOJ’s suit force the company to open Apple Watch functionality, it would not only limit watch-based iPhone sales, it would also potentially open the device up to Android users, which, in turn, could have a positive impact on sales.
Meanwhile, Fortnite maker Epic Games has been accusing Apple’s iOS App Store of antitrust violations for years in an ongoing, arduous legal battle.
“Apple often enforces its App Store rules arbitrarily,” the suit says.
And unlike Android devices, iPhones do not allow for sideloading apps, meaning that Apple has control over any app in its App Store.
“While Apple has reduced the tax it collects from a subset of developers, Apple still extracts 30 percent from many app makers,” the suit says.
On Thursday, the Coalition for App Fairness (CAF) – which includes Epic Games, Spotify, Deezer, Proton and other companies – released a statement in favor of the DOJ’s action against Apple.
The United States Department of Justice this morning filed a lawsuit accusing Apple of monopolistic smartphone practices.
Apple swiftly countered by arguing that — if successful — such a suit would inhibit its ability to compete in the crowded smartphone market.
This lawsuit threatens who we are and the principles that set Apple products apart in fiercely competitive markets.
We believe this lawsuit is wrong on the facts and the law, and we will vigorously defend against it.
At the same time, Apple has also been embroiled in lawsuits from Epic Games, challenging its App Store revenue practices.
Watch: Elon Musk, Sam Altman and the rest of the billionaires are fighting over the future of AIThe scrap over who should run OpenAI, and how it should be managed is still the hottest topic in tech.
Most recently, former co-founder and backer Elon Musk sued the AI company best known for ChatGPT and its work with Microsoft for what he considers to be an abandonment of its founding principals.
That suit kicked off a storm of discussion amongst tech investors, some of whom have a stake in OpenAI.
Is his view hurting work on open-source AI?
Buckle up, everyone, it’s going to be one hell of a year for tech drama.
Coinbase, one of the largest crypto exchanges globally, bit back on Wednesday during a hearing to decide whether it committed securities violations.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed the suit in June 2023, just one day after it sued Binance, the largest crypto exchange by volume, over securities matters.
In the SEC’s claims against Coinbase, it also alleged that the 13 cryptocurrencies available for trading on the exchange were securities.
Although separate, the Binance suit also had 12 crypto assets mentioned as securities.
The judge requested that the securities-focused agency explain what elements of crypto assets constitute investment contracts.
