[jlarocco]

But the value of stock images is to use them somewhere else.

Lets say I write an article negatively portraying the electronics manufacturing industry and use these images along with the article. I'm pretty sure Apple wouldn't like it if they found out...

[MartinCron]

You are extending Apple way more rights than they actually have. Trademark and copyright don't exist to keep people from saying negative things about you.

[archangel_one]

No, but libel and slander laws do exist to keep people from saying untrue negative things about you, so it still pays to be careful if that's what you intend to do.

[MartinCron]

Libelous and/or slanderous content wouldn't be made any more or less illegal by having or not having identifiable brands in stock photography.

Despite the reactionary comments in this thread, we're not in a corporatist dystopia where it's against the law to publish a photograph of a ubiquitous consumer device.

[DigitalSea]

The number of times I've seen someone say, "Apple sucks", "The iPhone sucks", "Apple are tax evaders" without recourse I seriously doubt Apple can or would do anything when someone is expressing their opinion. Free speech buddy.

Libel and slander laws are more directed at individuals... large corporate companies are free game in my opinion.