Too harsh? That's borderline industrial espionage.
Melodramatic much? Apple's language to them was "actions that may hinder the performance or intended use of the App Store, B2B Program, or the Program."
Please explain to me how iFixit tearing down the fourth generation AppleTV a month ahead of schedule hinders the performance or intended use of the App Store, the B2B Program, the developer program itself or any combination thereof. Because last I checked, their actions do none of that.
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime". As a developer, I _always_ have access to information that is not publicly available. That's the most essential thing in any business relationship, that you have to trust the other side to hold up their side of the bargain.
If you are signed up for pre-release hardware or software, and you abuse the privilege, then yes, that privilege can and should be revoked. They are doing far more than revoking their pre-release software privileges.
iFixit has been demonstrating very strongly that they cannot be trusted. If you read through this thread, you will even find some people saying that actually Apple is to blame because they should have known that iFixit cannot be trusted!
Yeah, I won't go that far. Though, I don't exactly understand what is harmful about a product teardown. It's not like they break into Apple's headquarters, steal Death Star plans and then sell them to the Rebels or anything like that. They take released hardware acquired legitimately and they tear it down to reveal what it looks like to hobbyists and enthusiasts who are planning on buying them anyway. It builds hype and people then go out and spend money. Doesn't seem like it causes any hard for Apple. But yeah, I won't go "victim blaming" Apple for trusting iFixit as iFixit's only persistent offense to Apple is calling them out on how unrepairable their products are.
Well, it isn't a "punishment". A and B sign a contract. B breaches the contract. A decides the finish the business relationship. That's not a punishment, it's just normal business (except for the breach of contract).
I didn't read the terms, so I can't comment directly on them. However, a contract that limits control like that under the threat of cancellation of one's ability to simply submit and maintain apps on the App Store, again, seems harsh. Again, it's not like their teardown of the AppleTV did anything to compromise the App Store. If you fail to follow the rules of a given privilege, that privilege should be revoked. They failed to follow the privilege pertaining to unreleased hardware/software, therefore that privilege should be revoked. That shouldn't mess up their ability to put apps on the App store as doing so is needless and accomplishes nothing other than being punitive. If that's in the contract, then the contract was needlessly harsh.