Apple Sued by App Developer Over its Continuity Camera

Apple is being sued by Reincubate, which makes the Camo smartphone webcam app. It has filed a lawsuit against Apple in a U.S. federal court in New Jersey, accusing the company of anticompetitive conduct and patent infringement.

The suit alleges that Apple copied Camo’s technology, integrated similar features into iOS, and used control over its software ecosystem to disadvantage Reincubate’s Camo product.

Reincubate’s Camo and Camo Studio apps allow iOS or Android phones to function as webcams for Mac and PCs. The company launched Camo in 2020. In 2022, Apple introduced Continuity Camera, a feature that enables iPhones to serve as webcams for Macs but works only within Apple’s device ecosystem. According to the lawsuit, Apple copied patented features from Camo and built them into iOS to “redirect user demand to Apple’s own platform-tied offering.”

The complaint argues that Apple’s conduct violates U.S. antitrust law by reinforcing dominance in the smartphone software market and limiting users’ ability to switch to competing platforms. It also claims Apple infringed Reincubate’s patents. Reincubate is seeking monetary damages and court orders to block Apple’s alleged misconduct. The case is filed as Reincubate Ltd v. Apple Inc in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

Reincubate says Apple initially encouraged development of Camo for iOS. The lawsuit states that Apple “actively induced and encouraged” the company to develop and market the app before incorporating similar functionality into iOS as Continuity Camera. It characterizes Apple’s behavior as “Sherlocking,” described as “shorthand for Apple’s pattern of appropriating and extinguishing innovative software developed outside its ecosystem.”

The complaint further alleges that Apple built a close relationship with Reincubate to gain insight into its technology. “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,” the lawsuit says.

Reincubate claims Camo had significant internal use at Apple before the launch of Continuity Camera. “Camo was used by thousands of Apple employees, across all divisions of the company,” the lawsuit says. “At first, Apple encouraged Reincubate to increase its investment in Camo. But when Apple recognized that Camo was a threat — it took steps not only to copy it, thereby infringing Reincubate’s patents, but also to undermine Camo’s functionality such that Reincubate could not compete with Apple’s rip-off, called Continuity Camera, which was only operable between Apple devices and Mac computers.”

In a blog post, Reincubate CEO Aidan Fitzpatrick says Apple’s actions were designed to suppress competition.

“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,” Fitzpatrcik writes.

Fitzpatrick says Apple had “thousands of staff” running the app internally and made “all sorts of promises” about support.

“Yet once we’d proven it could be done and users loved it, they took it and built our features into a billion iPhones, Macs, displays, iPads and TVs, while shutting us out and preventing additional interop we could provide to the ecosystem.”

Fitzpatrick says he was initially “puzzled” by Apple’s decision to build Continuity Camera. “Connecting two devices and seeking out a mount didn’t seem like the sort of setup that Apple would lean into,” he writes, adding that during the pandemic he expected Apple to focus on improving camera hardware and remote-work needs. He later argued that Apple’s motivation became clearer: “We’d not come between Apple and users, we’d come between Apple and their walled garden.”

He adds that the lawsuit raises broader concerns beyond Camo itself, including “whether there’s room for developers to stimulate the building blocks of the digital experience, or whether we must limit ourselves to building platforms that stand alone in the cloud, or ideas that are too insignificant to duplicate and freeze out.”

The lawsuit also notes that the U.S. government filed a separate antitrust case against Apple in 2024, which remains ongoing.

Image credits: Header photo licensed via Depositphotos.