Functionally it is similar, but trains are very critical civil infrastructure. In the case of John Deere such fraud can also have a serious impact, but it does not affect the public in the same way.
If they want to explicitly claim exclusivity on maintenance or a certain enforced product lifetime, fine, it is a nasty practice but fair enough. But not making the operators aware of these conditions, when they knew months beforehand what would happen when they lost the tender, and while it was seriously affecting the public later on, that is criminal in a way that is not comparable to Apple's practices for instance.
If they want to explicitly claim exclusivity on maintenance or a certain enforced product lifetime, fine, it is a nasty practice but fair enough. But not making the operators aware of these conditions, when they knew months beforehand what would happen when they lost the tender, and while it was seriously affecting the public later on, that is criminal in a way that is not comparable to Apple's practices for instance.