Definitely not a lawyer, but my read of that is that the files have been released to the Apache Foundation, and not to me. Unless and until the Apache folks put a license grant in themselves, then I don't see a clear chain of permissions from the original authors to myself.
Since Apache pretty clearly knows that they're distributing the files, I assume there's an implicit transfer and inspection grant there, but I see nothing saying that I can modify those files, or transfer them to anyone else.
My understanding of the GPL is that if I write something, and give it to you under GPL terms, then you have most of the rights that I have, but nobody else does, yet. After the transfer, either of us can now grant rights to someone else (albeit somewhat fewer rights, in your case), but we have to actually do it. If neither of us took the explicit step of granting rights, then someone else who intercepted the transmission wouldn't legally be able to incorporate the code in one of their projects. I see no reason why the Apache license would be different; it grants more rights on an authorized transfer, but transfers must still be authorized.
As far as I can see, that's our present status; we're eavesdroppers on the transfer of code from IBM to Apache, and until Apache explicitly says we can use it, it's strictly their code.