- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
Smartphone video app maker sues Apple for stealing camera tech
Camo, released by London-based Reincubate in 2020, enables the use of smartphones as webcams for computer-based video calls.
The maker of a smartphone video app has sued Apple in a New Jersey federal court alleging that the iPhone maker stole its technology and holds an illegal monopoly over the U.S. smartphone software market.
According to Reincubate Ltd., Apple copied patented features of its app Camo, which works with multiple operating systems; and incorporated them into iOS in order to "redirect user demand to Apple’s own platform-tied offering”. Apple’s conduct violates U.S. antitrust law by locking users into its dominant mobile operating system and preventing them from changing to competitors; the lawsuit said. The U.S. government brought similar antitrust allegations against Apple in a 2024 lawsuit that is still underway.
Apple reportedly said, "Apple competes fairly while respecting the intellectual property rights of others, and these camera features were developed internally by Apple engineers.”
Whereas Reincubate CEO Aidan Fitzpatrick reportedly said, "Rather than competing with us, Apple deployed a series of obstacles to tilt the playing field, infringed our IP, and did so in service of preventing competition from rival platforms.”
Camo, released by London-based Reincubate in 2020, enables the use of smartphones as webcams for computer-based video calls. As per the lawsuit, Apple ‘actively induced and encouraged’ Reincubate to develop and market Camo for iOS before the tech giant copied it and integrated its features into iOS as ‘Continuity Camera’ in 2022.
Apple’s conduct was called an example of ‘Sherlocking’ by Reincubate which it said was "shorthand for Apple’s pattern of appropriating and extinguishing innovative software developed outside its ecosystem”.
The suit reportedly said, "In most of those cases, Apple has not actively induced the developer to test and build software. Here, Apple actively cultivated a relationship of trust with Reincubate, induced the company to share technical details, beta builds, and market data, and leveraged that privileged access to inform its own development of Continuity Camera. In addition to its antitrust claims, the lawsuit accused Apple of infringing Reincubate patents. The company requested an unspecified amount of monetary damages and court orders blocking Apple's alleged misconduct.”



