Legal Abstract
Sample Legal Abstract

Publication: Ars Technica

Author: John Brodkin

Date: August 16, 2019

Title: Apple Sues Company That Sells “Perfect Replicas” of iOS Without a License”

URL: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/08/apple-sues-virtual-iphone-vendor-that-helps-hackers-find-ios-bugs/

Copy of Apple’s original lawsuit (PDF) available: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.555634/gov.uscourts.flsd.555634.1.0.pdf

Amended filing:

Facts

Corellium is a company that sells access to virtual machines that run copies of iOS. .Corellium offers access to these copies of iOS via a cloud service and through private installations on a customer’s premises. The private installations cost $1 million per year. According to Apple, Corellium does so without license or permission from Apple.

Plaintiff’s Claim

Direct and contributory copyright infringement.

Defendant’s Claim

No answer as of date of article publication.

Issue of Law

Can Corellium qualify for Apple’s assertion that it does not pursue good faith security research for violations of its copyrights? Does Corellium have any defense to Apple’s claims of direct and contributory copyright infringement?

Apple notes that, copyright notwithstanding, it is committed to security research, and that it has never pursued legal action against a security researcher. Apple offers up to $1 million per security report to researchers through its bug bounty programs. Apple has also announced that it will provide custom versions of the iPhone to legitimate security researchers to allow them to conduct research on Apple devices and software.

According to Apple, Corellium makes no effort to confine use of its product to good-faith research and testing of iOS. Apple claims that Corellium “ is indiscriminately marketing the Corellium Apple Product to any customer …[and] Corellium is not selectively limiting its customers to only those with some socially beneficial purpose and/or those who promise to use Apple’s copyrighted works, through the Corellium Apple Product, only in lawful ways …”.

Additionally, Apple notes that the current case is not a question of whether only certain portions of the copyrighted works have been infringed upon, because Corellium explicitly markets its product as one that allows the creation of “virtual” Apple devices.

Applicable Law

Direct copyright infringement – computer programs and graphical user interface elements – 17 U.S.C. § 501

Contributory copyright infringement- 17 U.S.C. § 501

Amended complaint – Circumvention of copyright protection systems – 17 U.S.C. § 1201

Holding

None yet

Impact on IT

Although this is a copyright infringement case, it has serious implications for cybersecurity because the product in question is marketed to anyone — including including foreign governments and commercial enterprises — for any purpose whatsoever.

Apple’s amended complaint asserts that Corellium’s product is primarily designed to circumvent copyright as described in Section 1201 of the DMCA. Critics of the lawsuit claim that this invocation of Section 1201 is an abusive attempt to stifle competition and security research.