Your thinking is flawed: moral failures of others do not entitle you to do the same. If everyone would do that, the world would be an even crappier place than it already is.
But then again, in our modern society everyone seems to know what their rights and entitlements are, moral duties… not so much.
It's entirely philosophical so you can have your own thoughts. I think your thinking is flawed.
It's easy to regurgitate 'two wrongs don't make a right', but why is necessarily true and why is it just that simple? Not all moral failures equally immoral. If someone murders my sister, would it be immoral to punch them in a fit of rage after finding out? I would argue no. Would it be immoral to kill them, probably yes.
So it's:
One of the world's richest companies, Apple, pursuing lower costs leading them to use cheap labour that ultimately causes worker abuse and suicides (and god knows however many more other issues they've had)
versus
Me not returning an iPhone that the sent me by their own mistake.
To me, it's almost satire to apply the 'two wrongs don't make a right' philosophy here.
EDIT: I didn't read your post properly sorry. Just realised that you were talking about
entitlement to do something immoral back.
Again, it's not a simple answer. If Apple were to contact me to say they accidentally sent me something and would arrange to pick it up from my home then I'd be happy to oblige. However If they don't contact me, then I'm not spending any effort to contact them. If they don't offer to pick it up from my home, then I'm not spending any time to travel to the post office to send it off.
Is actively doing something to obtain a result the same as getting the same result without any effort? Knowing Apple has done immoral deeds, is it just as bad to walk into an Apple store to steal a phone as it is to receive one they sent by accident and not let them know about it?