It was for 11 months, and the event was for launching the competitor product.
I would understand the argument if they boosted for a reason which wasn’t to give themselves an advantage over the competition, but in this example that was their exact plan! Boost during launch to give their new competing product a kick start, and give themselves an advantage nobody else has launching a service.
And I might understand it if they boosted to the top for the keyword “files”, but the keyword was “Dropbox”.
The Apple's statement is technically correct as it could be interpreted about what's the current situation or what is their company policy. It doesn't say it never happen.
Think of it like the "muslims don't eat pork" statement. Although the general policy is that muslims don't eat pork, there are clear exceptions where they can eat pork(when no other food is available and they starve). Also, there are muslims that simply love prosciutto and they sin.
Surely the company is responsible for the actions of their employees but there's a distinction between company policy and individuals actions.
Of course someone can claim that these were sham mails designed to make upper management look good despite not having any indications whatsoever to support that. I've heard that the world is only 4000 years old and the god put dinosaur fossils to confuse us, therefore I'm willing to accept that people are going to believe whatever they would like to believe.
I'm willing to accept that people are going to believe whatever they would like to believe.
That doesn't stand if it's only Apple's apps and events that get this special treatment. Did Dropbox's app get a boost during Dropbox promotional events?
Anyway, it’s obviously a case of special treatment that was forbidden of being repeated once made aware by the higher management.
The follow up e-mails indicate that the upper management wasn't happy about this and demanded high level approval before this happens next time.
So it's not really evil Apple caught doing something that they say they don't. Its more like corrupt Apple where someone did something somewhat justifiable(A relevant app being boosted during an event could be justified, though better not make it a habit) and then conveniently forgot to turn it back. Later a high level officer created a mechanism for preventing this happening again.
If it was something fineable, I would have been completely fine if Apple paid a fine and damages to Dropbox and others. Yet, I would stop short from labelling the company as "lying" as their words seem to match their actions with an exception of one event that was taken care of.
Remember the time when it was revealed that Google invited developers to discuss hiring or acquisition but copy their work, apply for patents before them? That also wasn't Google doing it, it was more like "ambitious white collars hacking their way to boost career", to put it lightly.
After all, companies are simply made of people with contracts. Surely the company is responsible for the actions of their employees but there's a distinction between company policy and individuals actions.