蘋果不起訴谷歌侵權(quán)是因?yàn)榕铝藛幔?
????從布拉格這樣遠(yuǎn)離信息中心的偏遠(yuǎn)地帶遙看蘋果(Apple)的專利侵權(quán)訴訟案,我真的說不清楚陪審團(tuán)對于蘋果針對所謂的“快速鏈接”軟件源自何處的解釋,能否做到像丹尼爾?伊蘭?迪爾格周日在AppleInsider網(wǎng)站上所發(fā)表的那篇文章那樣心中有數(shù)【三星(Samsung)和谷歌(Google)聯(lián)手竊取蘋果數(shù)據(jù)探測技術(shù)解密】。 ????迪爾格對于“快速鏈接”技術(shù)的歷史進(jìn)行了深入探究,但是在閱讀文章的過程中,我不禁回想起了一件事,當(dāng)年在蘋果起訴HTC這個(gè)安卓陣營中第一個(gè)感受到喬幫主訴訟怒火的廠商時(shí),喬布斯對自己的傳記作家曾說過這樣的一段話,他說: ????“我們打官司等于是在表明態(tài)度,我們就是想說,‘谷歌你XX的剽竊了iPhone的創(chuàng)意,吃人不吐骨頭地剽竊了我們的技術(shù)。你們這些江洋大盜。’” ????“我就是只剩最后一口氣……也要制止這種惡行。我要徹底摧毀安卓,因?yàn)樗褪琴\贓。我不惜為此發(fā)動(dòng)一場熱核戰(zhàn)爭。他們肯定怕得要死,因?yàn)樗麄冎雷约河凶铩!?/p> ????如果谷歌才是抄襲蘋果技術(shù)的元兇——本案中的技術(shù)即是指數(shù)據(jù)探測,相關(guān)事實(shí)似乎也肯定了這一點(diǎn)——那為什么蘋果要起訴三星呢? ????兩周以前,三星公司的律師在開庭陳述中曾提出了上述疑問,這樣的質(zhì)疑的確能夠引發(fā)陪審團(tuán)的共鳴。 ????事實(shí)上,早在2012年8月,我就曾嘗試對此事進(jìn)行過剖析,當(dāng)時(shí)正值蘋果對三星第一輪訴訟結(jié)束后不久。蘋果在這一輪訴訟中獲得了高達(dá)10億美元的賠償金。我在文章中這樣寫到: ????“現(xiàn)在回顧起來,(起訴三星而非谷歌)真是明智之舉。隨著蘋果在結(jié)案陳詞中將案情鋪展在陪審團(tuán)面前,三星的剽竊行為簡直不言自明。韓國廠商不僅下作到連蘋果的手機(jī)包裝盒都要模仿,而且還留下了書面記錄,足以證明這家公司仔細(xì)檢查過iPhone觸摸屏的每個(gè)方面,以期找到利用蘋果的設(shè)計(jì)決策來改善三星產(chǎn)品的方法。 ????‘我們在審判過程中出示了海量的證據(jù),’蘋果公司的CEO蒂姆?庫克在判決宣布后告訴員工說。‘這些證據(jù)表明,三星的抄襲行為遠(yuǎn)比我們知道的還要更惡劣?!?/p> ????“谷歌是否也留下了類似的書面記錄尚有待觀察。除此之外,谷歌還可以宣稱,安卓系統(tǒng)并沒有為它帶來任何直接收益,因此抄襲并不會(huì)導(dǎo)致實(shí)際的利益受損,這個(gè)伎倆谷歌在應(yīng)對甲骨文公司的起訴時(shí)就已經(jīng)用過了。雖然安卓系統(tǒng)可能已經(jīng)為谷歌帶來了數(shù)百億美元的廣告收入,但要以此作為證據(jù)來說服陪審團(tuán),難度會(huì)更大一些。 ????‘問題的關(guān)鍵在于戰(zhàn)術(shù)選擇,’FOSS Patents公司的弗羅里安?穆勒說?!覀儧]有任何理由認(rèn)為,蘋果會(huì)害怕直接起訴谷歌。針對其他設(shè)備制造商發(fā)起反擊只是策略上更為方便的舉動(dòng)?!?/p> ????順便提一下,穆勒已經(jīng)徹底改變了對于蘋果專利訴訟策略的看法,以至于在周日與迪爾格就發(fā)表在AppleInsider上的那篇文章簡單交流過意見之后,他就屏蔽了迪爾格的Twitter賬戶。 ????看來,這家伙的氣還沒有消。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)) ????譯者:徐黃兆 ???? |
????Watching Apple's (AAPL) patent infringement trial from afar -- today, it's from Prague -- I can't tell if the jury got as clear an explanation of where Apple's so-called "quick link" software came from as the one Daniel Eran Dilger posted Sunday on AppleInsider (How Samsung & Google teamed up to steal Apple Data Detectors for Android). ????But reading Dilger's deep dive into the history of the technology I'm reminded of what Steve Jobs told his biographer the day Apple sued HTC, the first of the Android manufactures to feel the litigious wrath of Jobs: ????"Our lawsuit is saying, 'Google you f***ing ripped off the iPhone, wholesale ripped us off. Grand theft.” ????"I will spend my last dying breath... to right this wrong. I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this. They are scared to death, because they know they are guilty." ????Well, if Google (GOOG) is the company that copied Apple's technology -- and in the case of Apple's data detectors, it would seem they are -- why is Apple suing Samsung? ????Samsung's lawyers raised this question in their opening statement two weeks ago, and it's an argument that could resonate for the jury. ????I took a crack at it in August 2012, right after the first Apple v. Samsung trial ended in Apple's favor to the tune of $1 billion. ????"In retrospect, [suing Samsung, not Google] was smart move. As Apple laid out its narrative for the jury in its closing arguments, the Samsung story was an easy one to tell. Not only had the Korean manufacturer imitated Apple's designs down to the boxes the devices came in, but it left a paper trail that showed the company scrutinizing every aspect of the iPhone touchscreen for ways Apple's design decisions could improve Samsung's products. ????'The mountain of evidence presented during the trial,' Apple CEO Tim Cook told employees after the verdict, 'showed that Samsung's copying went far deeper than we knew.' ????"Whether Google left a similar paper trail remains to be seen. Moreover, Google can claim, as it did when it was sued by Oracle, that Android doesn't produce any direct revenue for the company, so there can be zero damages. Android may generate billions of ad dollars, but that's a harder story to sell a jury. ????'It's all about tactics,' says FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller. 'There's no reason Apple would have to be afraid of suing Google directly. It's just tactically more convenient to go against other device makers.'" ????Mueller, by the way, has so thoroughly changed his tune on Apple's patent litigation strategy that on Sunday, after a brief exchange with Dilger over the AppleInsider piece, Mueller blocked Dilger's Twitter account. ????Tempers, it seems, are running high. |
最新文章