Yea, I just had a vary surreal moment reading about this. I started from http://www.itproportal.com/2011/07/20/fake-apple-stores-mushrooming-china-no-iphone-5-

Yea, I just had a vary surreal moment reading about this. I started from http://www.itproportal.com/2011/07/20/fake-apple-stores-mushrooming-china-no-iphone-5-inside/ http://www.itproportal.com/2011/07/20/fake-apple-stores-mush... which at least link’s to it’s source. And says: "pictures of what looks like an Apple store but is in reality a completely genuine rip-off; the author of the post also confirms that the store was torn down and replaced by a bank" vs. what was actually said: "we went back to this store 5 days later and couldn’t find it, having overshot by two blocks, I seriously thought that it had simply been torn down and replaced with a bank in the meantime – hey, it’s China. That could happen." So the Blog spam is a poor knockoff of a blog of about a knockoff store selling knockoff's of a real company's products. Yet the blog spam is still concerned enough about being copied that it’s using java script to prevent people copy pasting their text. Does that mean the knockoff story is also trying to keep people from copying them? And could someone be trying to reverse engineer a device sold in that store? PS: Now concider for a moment where in the chain of fake this comment sit's.