If Apple denied they owned the phone then the seller may be guilty of falsely claiming it was an iPhone, similar to selling a faux purses on the street corner.
The web publisher may be guilty of making a false claim that the phone belonged to Apple. I happen to know that publishers can print any lie they want and the only consequence if somebody can prove libel.
If Apple denied ownership then the complexion of this case completely changed.
The problem with the law still remains for both parties... as neither one attempted to get it back to the rightful owner (whomever that would be, if it wasn’t Apple’s) and my guess is that no matter whether they say they knew it was Apple’s or they thought it was someone else’s — they’re “nailed” either way ... LOL ...
This is a no-win situation for them.
You see... it’s not an Apple-pushed issue here... it’s a “legal issue” here which just happens to involve Apple. If they both did not believe it was Apple’s iPhone, they still both have a problem with the law and violating it and committing a felony, by not getting it back to the rightful owner, treating it like it is their own (in that it can be “sold” and “bought”). They’re in a heap of trouble even with it not being Apple’s iPhone prototype ... :-)