I think you stumble onto something important here...
There is no transparency in the approach that the individual should have gone to Apple first, quietly. How long does he GIVE Apple to address the issue? How does he ensure that he is given the credit (which he is due), for discovering the issue and alerting Apple to it? The whole power-structure here puts Apple in too much control of the process. There is a conflict of interest in Apple demanding that all developers go to them first, before public release, or risk having their developer access pulled.
Ultimately, that is what I come back to time and time again. It doesn't matter if the developer handled this the right way or the wrong way - Apple exerts too much influence on the discovery process when they can take retaliatory action against anyone who challenges their world-view. Apple has illustrated time and time again that they're willing to drive issues to outrageously petty acts of retaliation. The lost iPhone and how they went after Endgadget is enough example. It wasn't STOLEN, it was LOST, and Apple refused to officially claim it as theirs but they demanded it back - and used their clout, influence and deep pockets to get their way.
Apple is uncool.
Contributr 
