India’s consumer regulator has escalated an investigation into Apple’s software warranty terms after complaints that the iOS 18 update caused screen and microphone problems on iPhones, leaving some users facing costly repairs for defects they say followed the software upgrade.
The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has ordered a “detailed investigation” into the matter, increasing pressure on Apple in one of its fastest-growing markets. The probe could ultimately result in fines, refunds to affected customers or changes to Apple’s business practices if the company is found to have violated consumer-protection rules.
The dispute centers on a question that has been seeking an answer as smartphones rely more heavily on software: who should bear the cost when a software update causes a device to malfunction?
Register for the next Tekedia Mini-MBA.
Register for Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Apple is contesting the regulator’s allegations. In an August 20 response to investigators seen by Reuters, the company stated that its policy of providing no warranty for software is consistent with global industry practice and that iOS 18 did not suffer from any systemic defect.
Apple said it had subjected iOS 18 to stringent testing and had not identified any issues or safety concerns with the update in India. The company also said the CCPA’s case was based on 75 complaints and that only about 11% of iPhones in India were still running iOS 18 by June 2026.
The regulator, however, has framed the issue more broadly, saying the complaints concern violations of the rights of “consumers as a class.” That moves the case beyond whether individual customers experienced isolated technical failures and toward whether Apple’s warranty and repair policies unfairly shift the consequences of software problems onto consumers.
Apple Defends Software Warranty Terms
The CCPA began examining the issue after receiving what it described as a large number of complaints following the rollout of iOS 18 in late 2024. Users reported green, pink or white lines appearing on their displays after upgrading, along with microphone malfunctions and other problems.
The regulator says some consumers were then required to pay “exorbitant amounts” to repair or replace damaged displays even though the problems were allegedly connected to Apple’s software update.
An iPhone 15 screen repair, for example, can cost an estimated 27,900 rupees ($291), according to the regulator’s documents. That amounts to more than a third of the phone’s retail price, turning what might appear to be a software problem into a substantial financial burden for the customer.
“Charging consumers for issues arising from the company’s own negligence violates the principle of fair trade,” the CCPA told Apple.
Apple rejects that characterization. Its software license agreements state that the software is provided “without warranty of any kind,” while its limited warranty covers hardware rather than software. Under those terms, users can be responsible for repair costs even if a software problem affects the functionality of a physical component such as a display.
In its August response, Apple argued that consumers were informed of the software warranty limitations before installing the update. It also said similar approaches are used by other major electronics manufacturers, including Sony and Samsung.
“A requirement that every issue … be treated as a breach of an absolute warranty would effectively convert any software provider into an insurer against all technological risk,” Apple said.
The argument underpins the central legal issue facing the company. Apple is not simply defending its response to individual iPhone failures. It is defending a contractual framework under which software and hardware are treated differently even though modern smartphones are increasingly dependent on the interaction between the two.
The CCPA has already indicated that it is not satisfied with Apple’s initial explanations. On July 29, the regulator notified Apple that it had “escalated” the matter to its investigation wing for a “detailed investigation.”
“The case involves alleged violations of consumer rights,” the regulator said in its notice.
Under Indian consumer law, investigators can request documents and conduct hearings before submitting a final report to the regulator, according to Kirti Mahapatra, a New Delhi-based lawyer specializing in consumer law.
“Where contractual terms or warranty conditions form part of the alleged unfair practice, the CCPA can ask the company to ensure accurate information be provided to its customers,” Mahapatra said.
“It can also ask for changes to such terms, but that would be unprecedented.”
That possibility could make the investigation more consequential than a conventional consumer fine. A requirement to alter warranty disclosures or repair practices could have implications for how Apple structures its customer support model in India.
A Growing Market With Greater Regulatory Exposure
The dispute arrives as Apple is expanding rapidly in India, making the country pivotal to both its sales and manufacturing ambitions.
Apple’s iPhone held about 9% of India’s smartphone market last year, up from 4% in 2022, according to Counterpoint Research. The company has also been expanding manufacturing in the country as it seeks to build a larger production base outside China. That growth gives Apple more commercial exposure to India’s consumer and regulatory environment. The company is simultaneously facing scrutiny over other aspects of its business, including allegations involving domestic antitrust rules.
The iOS 18 dispute also reveals a broader problem for smartphone manufacturers. Software updates are increasingly inseparable from the operation of physical devices. A display, microphone, battery or camera may be a hardware component, but its functionality is controlled by software that can change after the device has been purchased.
That development has resulted in a difficult boundary for traditional warranty frameworks. A manufacturer can argue that a physical component has not failed mechanically, while a consumer can reasonably argue that the component stopped working following an update supplied by the manufacturer.
Apple’s position is that extending an absolute warranty to software would expose technology companies to responsibility for an almost unlimited range of technical problems. Regulators, by contrast, can examine whether the contractual language gives consumers sufficient protection when the manufacturer itself controls both the software update and the hardware ecosystem on which it operates.
The issue is not unique to India. In 2018, Italy sanctioned Apple after finding that the company had failed to adequately inform consumers about the potential impact of the iOS 10 update on older iPhones and had not provided sufficient support for phones outside their legal warranty period.
India’s investigation therefore places Apple in a familiar regulatory dispute, but under a consumer-protection framework that could have wider consequences for its operating practices.
For now, Apple maintains that iOS 18 had no systemic problems in India and that its existing warranty terms are standard industry practice. The CCPA’s decision to move the case into a detailed investigation means those assertions will now face closer examination.