5 ms·

Isn’t this describing people having “grey market” or worse products confiscated? If the Apple logo is on a part then the manufacturer likely made that part for

Isn’t this describing people having “grey market” or worse products confiscated? If the Apple logo is on a part then the manufacturer likely made that part for Apple under some agreement and the manufacturer is not permitted to make more of those exact pieces for other buyers. Also if those pieces were made for Apple and didn’t pass QA, then the manufacturer can’t just sell them. They have agreements to destroy them. If the Apple logo is on a thing then it’s a counterfeit someone is trying to pass off as real or an official part that “fell off a truck” or didn’t pass QA and should have been recycled or something… If I legitimately paid a manufacturer for a compatible part to be made, I’d expect no logo on it

CivBase 3y ago
> Isn’t this describing people having “grey market” or worse products confiscated? No. The products in question were assembled using a combination of standard hardware components and genuine OEM parts salvaged from broken Apple devices. Since Apple goes to great lengths to prevent third parties from accessing components used in Apple devices, salvaging OEM parts from busted machines is often the only legitimate way to produce replacement parts that are compatible with Apple products. > If the Apple logo is on a thing then it’s a counterfeit someone is trying to pass off as real or an official part None of the products in the examples from this article were branded with Apple logos or advertised as being genuine Apple products. Internal components (e.g. cables) within the products were found to have Apple branding because the parts were salvaged from genuine Apple devices. The Apple brand was never used to identify anything that wasn't a genuine, OEM component - ergo not counterfeit.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  > Internal components (e.g. cables) within the products were found to have Apple branding because the parts were salvaged from genuine Apple devices. Source? It seems far more likely those parts came from the original factory selling original parts under the table for whatever reasons, or are actually counterfeited with just the logo stamped on them afterwards. Salvaging parts from used devices at such scales would require a pretty extensive operation.
  - CivBase 3y ago
    So guilty until proven innocent, then? This is exactly why the title calls Apple's practice an "exploit". Apple recognizes that CBP does not follow due process and they take advantage of that by slapping their label on every last little, insignificant component - including stuff the customer will never even see. It probably helps catch counterfeits, but it has the added benefit of significantly disrupting legitimate competition. > Salvaging parts from used devices at such scales would require a pretty extensive operation. It'd be a lot easier than reverse-engineering every Apple component and manufacturing it yourself. What else is a legitimate replacement part producer supposed to do?
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      What does this have to do with providing a source? You are the one who wrote the, not trivially obvious, claim.
      - mynameisvlad 3y ago
        Your claim is just as not trivially obvious. So, source? In reality, nobody knows why Apple is doing it except the people who made the decisions nor would it really be possible to trace the parts, but it’s far more likely that it comes from the many devices that can be salvaged for parts than it coming from some black market operation coming from the factory.
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        My claim of what? If you meant my previous comment, I clearly phrased it as my own person opinion?
        mynameisvlad 3y ago
        In no way shape or form is that phrased as your own personal opinion. You asked the parent commenter for a source and then parroted an alternative theory as what actually happened. Considering you were so adamant on asking a source for the other person’s theory, and were so sure of your own, that you must have proof of it, right?
yencabulator 3y ago
Read the part under "Versus Competing Accessories", there's no Apple logo involved, there's nothing grey about a manufacturer making their own goods. Their alleged crime is that it's an earbud, with a shape that doesn't even look like Apple's products: https://www.oneplus.com/us/product/oneplus-buds https://www.oneplus.com/us/product/oneplus-buds

CivBase 3y ago

> Isn’t this describing people having “grey market” or worse products confiscated? No. The products in question were assembled using a combination of standard hardware components and genuine OEM parts salvaged from broken Apple devices. Since Apple goes to great lengths to prevent third parties from accessing components used in Apple devices, salvaging OEM parts from busted machines is often the only legitimate way to produce replacement parts that are compatible with Apple products. > If the Apple logo is on a thing then it’s a counterfeit someone is trying to pass off as real or an official part None of the products in the examples from this article were branded with Apple logos or advertised as being genuine Apple products. Internal components (e.g. cables) within the products were found to have Apple branding because the parts were salvaged from genuine Apple devices. The Apple brand was never used to identify anything that wasn't a genuine, OEM component - ergo not counterfeit.

MichaelZuo 3y ago
> Internal components (e.g. cables) within the products were found to have Apple branding because the parts were salvaged from genuine Apple devices. Source? It seems far more likely those parts came from the original factory selling original parts under the table for whatever reasons, or are actually counterfeited with just the logo stamped on them afterwards. Salvaging parts from used devices at such scales would require a pretty extensive operation.
- CivBase 3y ago
  So guilty until proven innocent, then? This is exactly why the title calls Apple's practice an "exploit". Apple recognizes that CBP does not follow due process and they take advantage of that by slapping their label on every last little, insignificant component - including stuff the customer will never even see. It probably helps catch counterfeits, but it has the added benefit of significantly disrupting legitimate competition. > Salvaging parts from used devices at such scales would require a pretty extensive operation. It'd be a lot easier than reverse-engineering every Apple component and manufacturing it yourself. What else is a legitimate replacement part producer supposed to do?
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    What does this have to do with providing a source? You are the one who wrote the, not trivially obvious, claim.
    - mynameisvlad 3y ago
      Your claim is just as not trivially obvious. So, source? In reality, nobody knows why Apple is doing it except the people who made the decisions nor would it really be possible to trace the parts, but it’s far more likely that it comes from the many devices that can be salvaged for parts than it coming from some black market operation coming from the factory.
      - MichaelZuo 3y ago
        My claim of what? If you meant my previous comment, I clearly phrased it as my own person opinion?
        mynameisvlad 3y ago
        In no way shape or form is that phrased as your own personal opinion. You asked the parent commenter for a source and then parroted an alternative theory as what actually happened. Considering you were so adamant on asking a source for the other person’s theory, and were so sure of your own, that you must have proof of it, right?

yencabulator 3y ago

Read the part under "Versus Competing Accessories", there's no Apple logo involved, there's nothing grey about a manufacturer making their own goods. Their alleged crime is that it's an earbud, with a shape that doesn't even look like Apple's products: https://www.oneplus.com/us/product/oneplus-buds https://www.oneplus.com/us/product/oneplus-buds