苹果战三星：输了声望，赢了官司又如何？

苹果公司(Apple Inc.)虽然在与三星的诉讼中取得表面上的胜利，但最后可能会后悔。加州陪审团日前裁定苹果在起诉三星电子的诉讼中获赔10.49亿美元，作为三星对于苹果无线专利“蓄意侵权”的行为负起法律责任。 《EE Times》记者Rick Merritt详尽报导了此次法院诉讼过程。“在苹果赢得与三星的诉讼后，整个 Android 社群应该感到十分担心，”Rick Merritt在最近的报导中提到，“针对 iPhone 的外观设计以及 iPhone 与 iPad 的用户接口，苹果现在可说是配备了经证实有效的几种武器，能够用于在法庭内外对 Android 竞争对手恣意施压了！” 苹果的确可能使用这项法宝来恫吓其它 Google Android 设备制造商，让他们不得不从市场撤下智能手机和平板电脑，或同意支付苹果公司高额的授权费用。或者，制造商们也可以采用微软公司(Microsoft)的 Windows 移动操作系统，就像该公司手机营销主管Bill Cox在法院宣判后那么兴高采烈一样。更可能的情况是，Google将重新设计其 Android 操作系统，以避免陷入任何像苹果-三星之间的争议。 然而，苹果应该且慢开香槟庆祝。事实上，苹果可能只是暂时赢得一场小规模的战斗，未来还有更多场硬仗要打。该公司甚至已经被锁定于其它专利纠纷了。例如，Google指控苹果侵犯摩托罗拉移动公司所拥有的部份专利。这场官司预计就要打好几个月或甚至多年。 苹果的无线专利战也将在其它国家上演。例如，上周在南韩首尔的法院中，苹果和三星互控侵权的诉讼。双方公司都被责令暂停销售部份智能手机与平板电脑，并须赔偿对方。 在美国和韩国的判决意味着这两家公司最终都必须坐下来商谈和解妥协之道。虽然这种情形应该不可能太快发生，但最后当双方终于都能冷静下来后，我估计两家公司应该会作出交叉授权的决定。 另 一方面，尽管打赢了官司，苹果在其博客上却未赢得太多掌声。事实上，我所看到的大多数网友意见似乎并不支持这个判决结果──而这也是苹果公司面临的更大 危机。一些观察家甚至在网络上评论，打赢三星的这场官司却也加深了消费者认为苹果“霸凌”的印象。在英国广播公司(BBC)一篇针对该主题的文章也可看到 许多读者响应并不欣赏这项判决的评论。虽然发表这些评论的网友们也没帮三星说什么好话，但却集中火力批评苹果，他们甚至还说苹果赢得是一场不应该被授权专利的诉讼。以下是一些例子： “苹果公司少在那里自以为是了──三星早就生产圆弧边缘的矩形手机了，这哪有什么突破性可言？” “任何人真的想弄清楚苹果用意何在，只需看看TED网站上的视讯短片对于混搭的解读。苹果并未真的发明什么 GUI 、鼠标或触控屏幕。他们只是意识到要先‘提出’这些想法，他们的行为就像伪君子一样──最后的结果并不是为了消费者，更多是为了苹果公司自己。” “在 iPhone 出现以前，市场上就已经有看起来与 iPhone 设计类似的手机了。” “我认为苹果在这方面荒谬地且过于高估自己的力量了，这将会惹恼许多以前中立的消费者。” 虽然也有些分析师认为，苹果可以利用其于美国法庭上所取得的胜利来削弱三星在智能手机市场的主导地位，但我并未看到这种情况发生。采用 Android 操作系统的设备也不会因此销声匿迹，(而苹果68%的市占率还可能些微下滑)，同时，微软的 Windows 操作系统市占率也不会从目前的5.4%增加到二位数。或许苹果公司还要求加州法院对三星的几种设备发出禁售令，但这也很快地就被取代。三星一向十分频繁地 推出新产品，不像他的竞争对手至少总要隔6-10个月的 iPhone 更换周期。很快地，加州判决的影响将被市场所遗忘，甚至从三星公司的资产负债表中消失。 然而，依然存在的是众多愤慨的消费 者，以及同样感到失望的供应链，以及亦敌亦友的合作伙伴。在所有美国公司的市场中，三星是苹果的竞争对手，同时，三星也刚好是供应苹果关键组件的一家供应商。当然，苹果还不至于自乱阵脚地去破坏对它来说仍是有利可图的合作伙伴关系，但不是也有人说要达到同样目的的方法还有很多吗？ 最后，我想引用一则张贴在《EETimes》的有趣评论作为这种情况的总结：“我希望下一则新闻标题不会是『愤怒的三星员工在32nm晶圆厂纵火』”。在此所说的三星晶圆厂制造的是什么产品呢？当然是给 iPhone 用的零件！ 本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载 编译：Susan Hong 参考英文原文：Apple Scores a Pyrrhic Victory，by Bolaji Ojo, Editor in Chief

相关阅读：
• 苹果战三星：鹬蚌相争，渔翁得利
• 苹果战三星：硅谷式爱国主义和创新精神
• 苹果战三星，站在中立者的角度看对错cPTesmc

{pagination} Apple Scores a Pyrrhic Victory Bolaji Ojo Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL) has scored a victory it may eventually regret. A California jury has awarded the company a tad above $1 billion in a lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (Korea: SEC), which was found liable of "willful infringement" of Apple's wireless patents. Rick Merritt has been covering the court proceedings extensively at a sister publication, EE Times. "The Android community should be very afraid in the wake of Apple's clear win Friday in its case against Samsung," Merritt warned in his latest report. "Apple is now armed with a handful of proven weapons it can wield against Android competitors in and out of court on the industrial design of its iPhone and the user interface of both the iPhone and iPad." Apple may indeed use this legal club to bludgeon other Google Android device makers into withdrawing their smartphones and tablets from the market or agreeing to pay hefty royalties to the Cupertino, Calif., company. These companies could also adopt the Windows mobile operating system from Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT), as Bill Cox, a marketing executive at the Redmond, Wash., company, gleefully tweeted after the verdict was announced. It's more likely that Google will rework its Android operating system to avoid any of the patents involved in the Apple-Samsung tussle. But Apple should hold off on uncorking the champagne. It might have won this skirmish, but there are many more battles ahead. It is locked in other patent disputes. For example, Google has accused Apple of violating some patents owned by Motorola Mobility, now a wireless hardware division of the search engine provider. That case will take months or years to play out. The wireless patent battles will also play out in other countries. Last week, for example, a court in Seoul, South Korea, found that Apple and Samsung infringed on each other's patents. The companies were ordered to stop selling certain smartphones and tablets and to pay each other some amount of money as compensation. Apple's bill was slightly higher than Samsung's. The verdicts in the US and Korea (along with previous ones in Europe) mean the two companies must eventually sit down and hash out a compromise. This won't happen soon, but eventually cooler heads will prevail at the two companies, and I predict a cross-licensing agreement will follow. In the meantime, Apple isn't winning that much applause in the blogosphere. In fact, the majority of the comments I have seen seem to be against the verdict. That's the bigger danger the company faces as consumers digest its verdict. The victory over Samsung has reinforced the impression Apple acts as a bully, as some observers have said in online comments. Many of the comments on a BBC article on the subject were not applauding the verdict. Even though the writers were not praising Samsung, they focused their ire on Apple, which they said won a verdict for things that should never have been patented. Here are some examples. · "Apple need to get over themselves -- Samsung have produced a thin rectangular phone with curved edges. Hardly groundbreaking." · "Anyone who wants a clear perspective on Apple's behaviour need only look at the short TED video on remixing. Apple did not invent GUI's, mice or touchscreens. They consciously 'lifted' most of the ideas and are behaving like complete hypocrites. The upshot is less for the consumer and more for Apple." · "There were phones that looked very similar to the iPhone way before the iPhone was thought of." · "I think Apple have ridiculously overplayed their hand here, and will upset a lot of formerly neutral consumers." Though some analysts say Apple can use its US court victory to whittle down Samsung's dominance of the smartphone market, I don't see this happening. Android OS devices won't fall off the map, either (its 68 percent marketshare may dip a bit), and Microsoft's Windows OS won't move to a double-digit marketshare from its current 5.4 percent. The Samsung devices Apple may ask the California court to ban will be quickly replaced. Samsung rolls out devices frequently, unlike its rival, which has moved more or less to a six-to-10-month iPhone replacement cycle. Soon the effects of the California verdict will be wiped clean from the market's memory and even from Samsung's balance sheet. What will remain is a vast pool of irritated consumers, an equally disappointed supply base, and a royally ticked off rival-partner. Samsung -- Apple's archrival in all of the American firm's markets -- happens to be a supplier of critical components to the company. It won't, of course, shoot itself in the foot by endangering the profitable partnership, but didn't somebody say there are many ways to skin a cat? An interesting comment posted on EE Times aptly sums up the situation: "I hope the next headline isn't 'Enraged Samsung employee starts fire at 32nm fab.'" The Samsung fab referenced here makes what? Components for iPhones. Nuff said.