Well I'm not going to continue to argue with you since you're clearly insistent on being obstinate.
When the can of Heinz beans goes from being made in America to being made in Mexico and is called Ole Beans, guess what? It's still Heinz beans. The fact they're called something else and made somewhere else doesn't mean the technology, talent, patents, recipe, etc. of the Heinz product ceases to exist simply because it's made somewhere else. The same is true of IBM PCs. They live on in the form of Lenovo. I don't know why that's so difficult for you to understand. But whatever, no point in continuing to argue about it. Believe whatever you makes you happy.
And you never answered my question in regard to the iPod hypothetical. Because according to you, the iPods that are made by Foxconn (using Apple-designed tech) in Foxconn factories are Apple products because they say Apple, but would be Foxconn products if they said Foxconn, despite the devices being exactly the same. That of course makes no sense. If Foxconn bought the division from Apple, and continued to use Apple's designs, and made them the same way they used to make them but called them Foxconn iPods, they'd still be exactly the same device, just owned by someone else with a different name on them. So again, it makes no sense, as the technology behind the product, that's the core of the product, is still Apple tech. It's no different from Lenovo. They make PCs based upon the technology, patents, and architecture they bought from IBM. There is no difference in the product. The only difference is who owns the division.
It's all irrelevant anyway, because even if you exclude IBM, Schiller is still wrong.