4. Your original product was a fraud, in the sense it wasn't something you developed, it was a high end, end of life product you bought on the cheap and sanded off. This was eventually discovered and publicly documented, but mum's the word from your side. This leaving to the side the fact it was late and out of spec - maybe you got lucky at the last minute and otherwise your scam would have ended last year, who knows.
False. Provide proof or evidence to the contrary.
Fully documented by
ngzhang.
None of the mining FPGA vendors "developed" their own FPGAs. They all designed boards, picked an FPGA and developed a bitstream. BFL designed boards, picked an FPGA and developed a bitstream.
How exactly does using recycled FPGAs make it a "fraud"?
You may be confusing it with the practice of sanding off a chip and printing a
different and wrong label on it in order to falsely
sell it as a different or new chip, similar to taking a 1GB sd card but labelling it as 16GB for sale. You're effectively complaining about (the equivalent of) an android phone, sold as having 16GB capacity, having a real 16GB card inside it, but with the label sanded off so that you can't see that it's a Sandisk, not a Kingston, even though the brand of the card was never mentioned in the phone specs. Oh noes! Fraud!
If the BFL single was called "xc6slx150 computation board" and had a chip with xc6slx150 printed on it (but was the Altera chip), then yes, that would be fraud.