Miles Ashworth: Forty million people woke up this morning as plaintiffs in a lawsuit they never agreed to join. Most of them don't know. That's — well, that's where I want to start.
Megan Skiendel: The Which? CPO. Yeah, I saw it.
Miles Ashworth: The Competition Appeal Tribunal handed Which? a Collective Proceedings Order in June 2026. Three billion pounds against Apple, representing every UK iCloud user from November 2018 to June 2026 — opt-out structure, meaning inertia is the engine. Nobody signs up. You're simply in. Now: the intuition here, stripped of everything — Apple built a flat with no real exits. You can technically leave, but the moment you try a non-Apple backup service on an iPhone or iPad, the technical friction is the point. Third-party services cannot offer a full-device backup on iOS. That's not an accident. That's the product. And the payout if Which? wins? Up to seventy-seven pounds. Trial date: October 2028.
Megan Skiendel: Hold on — October 2028?
Miles Ashworth: October 2028. By which point Apple will have shipped — what, three more versions of iOS? The behaviour the case is supposed to correct will be so thoroughly embedded it won't matter what a judge says. And Apple's defence, meanwhile, is that 'no customer is required to use iCloud.' Alternatives exist. Which is technically true in the same way that alternatives to breathing exist.
Megan Skiendel: That's the line I want to pull on.
Megan Skiendel: Because 'alternatives exist' falls apart the second you actually look at what those alternatives can do. Third-party services — literally cannot offer a full-device backup on iOS. Not won't. Can't. Apple's technical architecture prevents it. Which? has been arguing this since they filed in November 2024, and the CAT looked at that claim and said, yeah, plausible enough to proceed.
Miles Ashworth: The CAT also rejected Apple's attempt to block parts of the case before granting the CPO, which — I'll grant you — is not nothing.
Megan Skiendel: That's a procedural defeat for Apple. A real one.
Miles Ashworth: And the pricing — look, the pricing ladder is actually where it gets concrete, isn't it. Five gigabytes free, then ninety-nine pence a month for fifty gigabytes, up to — what is it — fifty-four pounds ninety-nine for twelve terabytes. Which? says those numbers are inflated specifically because the lock-in, the 2015 technical restriction on full-device backups, removed any competitive pressure on price.
Megan Skiendel: And Anabel Hoult was pretty unambiguous — no company, no matter how powerful, can get away with abusing its position. That's the CEO of Which? on record. And sitting behind all of this is the CMA, which has been scrutinising Apple's ecosystem practices more broadly. This isn't one consumer group going rogue.
Miles Ashworth: No, I — actually, fair. The institutional backing changes the read slightly. The question I'd still push on is whether winning in October 2028 produces anything a user would recognise as justice.
Miles Ashworth: The seventy-seven pounds. Can we actually sit with that number for a moment, because — right, so that figure is a maximum. It's three billion divided across forty million claimants. Before legal fees touch it. Before settlement haircuts. Before uptake rates collapse the denominator. Real consumers are looking at, I don't know, twelve pounds. Maybe.
Megan Skiendel: The machinery consumes itself.
Miles Ashworth: Every time. And meanwhile — here's the scenario I can't get out of my head. Tuesday morning. Someone's iPhone tells them iCloud is full. They tap through. Apple's interface offers them three upgrade tiers. Ninety-nine pence, two forty-nine, whatever. They tap again. They're on a paid plan. The CPO ruling has precisely zero effect on that moment. That nudge happens millions of times a week, regardless of what the CAT decided.
Megan Skiendel: That's — yeah, I'm not going to fight you on that.
Megan Skiendel: But the CPO changes Apple's legal exposure right now, before October 2028 even arrives. That's not nothing. Design decisions get reviewed internally when counsel tells you you're formally exposed. I've watched that happen. The deterrent isn't the payout — it might already be operating behind closed doors.
Miles Ashworth: Which is — fine, I'll take that. Reluctantly. But forty million people enrolled without knowing it, to potentially collect twelve pounds in three years, while Apple quietly audits a settings menu? That's a thin definition of justice.
Megan Skiendel: Fine. But thin definition of justice and no definition of justice aren't the same thing. And the part that actually keeps me up — it's not the £77, it's what happens if Which? wins in October 2028. They're a consumer advocacy group. Not a regulator. The CMA has teeth. Which? doesn't — not enforcement teeth, anyway. So they get a judgment. Against Apple. And then what, exactly? They can't compel Apple to redesign iCloud integration. They can't rewrite iOS architecture. They collect a cheque and issue a press release.
Miles Ashworth: Well — yes, that's the institutional gap nobody wants to say out loud, isn't it.
Megan Skiendel: And by October 2028, Apple will have iterated iOS — what, three times? The technical restriction on full-device backups that Which? filed against in November 2024 might not even be the relevant restriction anymore. The harm will have compounded into the next ecosystem. You're not getting accountability. You're getting archaeology.
Miles Ashworth: Fine. Maybe the lock-in is real. Maybe the deterrent already matters behind closed doors. I'll recant properly when I see the £77.
