[messe]

Yeah, that seems like a reasonable judgement. It sounds like he was passing off non-apple parts as actual apple parts (by not properly removing the logo), which would fall under (at least) trademark law (in my layman opinion), if not fraud.

Disclaimer: I'm an Apple fan, and have previously interviewed there, but I am quite critical of many of their actions like the lockdown on iOS (although I am a huge fan of the mandatory sandboxing)

[rlpb]

> It sounds like he was passing off non-apple parts as actual apple parts (by not properly removing the logo)

From the article, it doesn't sound like that to me at all. It sounds like Apple deliberately put the logo on individual parts to try and make this claim later. But the logo on the part itself presumably isn't visible on the finished product. Even if it were, it would still not be passing off because the part did originally come from Apple!

[nojito]

>Even if it were, it would still not be passing off because the part did originally come from Apple!

This isn't true.