Only where it's applicable. A meal planner company that has a logo that looks little like an apple logo doesn't really fall into this. If it was a phone shop then sure, but this is well outside of the needs-to-because-law scope and into the bullying scope.

Even if it were a phone shop there's zero chance of confusion, this is a frivolous suit and purposeful waste of court time.

Fuck that, trademark law is broken if it requires something that "looks like" bullying. It's just bullying with some flimsy justifications.

About as much as an apple looks like a pear.