They receive your IP address because that's how IP works; otherwise they wouldn't have an address to send data back (and IP packets with a spoofed source IP are dropped immediately). They might not do anything with it, but they definitely have access to it.
Sure, that's why they say "anonymous". If they do not delete the IP address as soon as technically possible they are lying about the anonymous part.
This is not about ability. This is about trust. They say the data is anonymous which means they are obligated to disregard the IP address and to not log it anywhere.
Sure it is. That's exactly what the following statement means: "Apple cannot identify the source of this data". How can you interpret that as anything else but their ability of identifying the source?
The statement is obviously not true; if they were forced to, by a government agency for example, to track the location information from a user from that point on they COULD; saying they can't is wrong IMHO.
The correct thing to say here is that they can, but they don't, unless forced to. But I guess that isn't the message Apple wants to communicate.
Out of context, that is what the statement would read. But with context I would read it as "Apple cannot identify the source of this data 'stored without IP addresses with us'"
I was specifically talking about storing your IP along with the location data. That makes no sense as it does not add value to the data.
They have access to it sure. But they have access to it through a lot of other methods. In fact they even have your credit card information. You gave to it them :)
