What do you mean for the sake of Apple? This didn't benefit Apple. He screwed with this guy for months because of a mistaken idea that the guy should have somehow known Apple's attitude towards secrecy without being told, and after months of messing him about sent him back the signed contract the second he had given up. There was no benefit to Apple here. In fact he harmed Apple by limiting their music collection in the initial stages. It's also not on the limits of ethics. It's unethical.

I presume you mean "the maximum physical limit of bad ethics" rather than any particular ethical standard.

On the absolute limit of ethics? This is simply not ethical anymore...

You mean on the limits of being sued for. Coz this man had zero ethics anywhere in his life unless "being ethical" was somehow correlated with also making money