蘋果公司(Apple Inc.)和三星電子(Samsung Electronics)雙方的法庭斗爭何時(shí)了？這場專利戰(zhàn)爭已經(jīng)演變到令人反感了，目前所提出的證據(jù)不足以服人，但所造成的傷害卻嚴(yán)重到可能得“掛急診”了！如果這兩家公司愿意走出法庭外去看一看，他們就會了解消費(fèi)者根本不在乎他們之間的這些小紛爭，不過競爭對手卻樂見其高層主管成天待在法庭，而非研發(fā)設(shè)計(jì)室中。想想看，誰才是這場訴訟的真正贏家？ 雖然的主流新聞媒體以及許多產(chǎn)業(yè)媒體都對這場訴訟提供地毯式的詳盡報(bào)導(dǎo)，包括蘋果認(rèn)為三星應(yīng)該為疑似公開復(fù)制 iPhone、iPad的矩形設(shè)計(jì)或其它設(shè)計(jì)模式付出多少代價(jià)。但我一直期望的是競爭雙方能夠盡快回到生產(chǎn)競爭的模式。 至今有關(guān)這場訴訟的種種細(xì)節(jié)已經(jīng)令人感到麻木了。到目前為止的劇情似乎演變得像是那種炎熱午后孩子們在學(xué)校院子推擠爭吵的情節(jié)。我可以想象老師正試著解決那 種“是她先捏我，我才踢她”的爭執(zhí)。蘋果和三星可能不明白這一點(diǎn)，但這就是大部份消費(fèi)者眼中看到目前正在加州法庭上演的情節(jié)。 對于兩家公司來說，無非是因?yàn)槔﹃P(guān)系太大而不得不然。我的意思并不是指任何一方可能得到的金錢補(bǔ)償。無論陪審團(tuán)的判決是否會讓任何一方實(shí)施經(jīng)濟(jì)補(bǔ)償，這兩家公司都足以因應(yīng)。對于蘋果公司來說，它可以輕松地開出一張超過千億美元的現(xiàn)金支票和有價(jià)證券。三星也一樣，它和在法庭上的競爭對手一起從無線手機(jī)的銷售中賺足了市場大部分的利潤，就算判決結(jié)果對蘋果較有利，三星的口袋也夠深，足以因應(yīng)蘋果的要求而支付25億美元的金額。 但是，雙方在法庭上爭鋒相對，滔滔不絕地提出“他說…，她說…”的你來我往爭執(zhí)之后，他們最后仍然得回到市場上，面對市占率的 真實(shí)決斗。至今我們并未在法庭上看到任何可能讓消費(fèi)者認(rèn)為三星一直公然侵權(quán)或違反專利法，因而得避免購買該公司產(chǎn)品的情況。蘋果公司最終可能以些微差距贏 得這場法律訴訟，但卻可能輸在輿論──許多人開始覺得這整個(gè)法律訴訟戰(zhàn)的用意似乎更像是要延緩競爭對手的產(chǎn)品上市腳步，而不是因?yàn)槿谴罅繌?fù)制蘋果的產(chǎn)品 了。當(dāng)然，死忠的蘋果粉絲一定不同意這個(gè)看法，而對另一家公司產(chǎn)品的愛用者來說，不管在法庭上彌漫著多少有關(guān)敗壞道德的言論與煙硝味，他們還是會去購買該公司的產(chǎn)品。 從一開始，我就認(rèn)為只有律師會是得以全身而退的最后贏家，特別是在有關(guān)專利訴訟的案件累積越多，也拖得越來越久以后。雖然專利訴訟有一定的程序，但蘋果目前所提供的證據(jù)也還不足以達(dá)到更高的訴訟層級，而無論三星是否會在下周出反駁的論點(diǎn)，也同樣起不了太大的作 用。雙方都無法證明擁有在無線通訊方面的許多關(guān)鍵技術(shù)，也不可能用削弱競爭對手優(yōu)勢的這種方式來贏得用戶的支持。 在寫這篇文章時(shí)，我又想到了摩托羅拉移動公司(Motorola Mobility Inc.)、諾基亞公司(Nokia)以及這兩家公司所面臨的挑戰(zhàn)。他們曾經(jīng)是這個(gè)市場上的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)廠商，但他們目前的處境卻告訴我們贏家將會來自何方。摩托羅拉移動公司現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)是一家傷痕累累的公司了，它目前的新東家Google在日前宣布全球裁員4,000人。諾基亞稍早也曾經(jīng)宣布過類似大規(guī)模的裁員行動。 早在十年前，當(dāng)摩托羅拉和諾基亞主導(dǎo)這一無線世界時(shí)，不管是蘋果還是三星在市場上都沒什么名氣。但這兩家公司卻后來居上，重挫市場上既有的主導(dǎo)大廠。所以，恕我在此直言建議這兩家公司：當(dāng)你們在法庭上大打可笑又無聊的專利戰(zhàn)，而讓你們公司的高層主管無法專注于真正的市場 戰(zhàn)時(shí)，新的競爭對手也正開始蠶食你們的市占率，緊盯著你們在去年取得的巨額利潤。 他們就出現(xiàn)在你們看不到的盲點(diǎn)，而且你們可能甚至都不知道有這些廠商。他們當(dāng)然不會在今年或甚至是不久的將來就贏走這個(gè)市場，但你們在無線領(lǐng)域所獲得的利潤實(shí)在太誘人，而且你們也已經(jīng)打開了一條裂縫讓他們進(jìn)行探索了。你們已經(jīng)對彼此造成了這樣危險(xiǎn)的傷口，這將不僅有利于那些不知名的廠商，甚至是市場上還不存在的未來廠商(競爭對手)。 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 編譯：Susan Hong 參考英文原文：Apple-Samsung: Can't We All Just Get Along?，by Bolaji Ojo, Editor in Chief

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 蘋果戰(zhàn)三星，站在中立者的角度看對錯(cuò)
• 歐盟或作和事佬，調(diào)停蘋果三星專利戰(zhàn)
• 蘋果三星對簿公堂內(nèi)容揭秘：誰是抄襲者？LVUesmc

{pagination} Apple-Samsung: Can't We All Just Get Along? Bolaji Ojo I can't wait for Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL) and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (Korea: SEC) to wrap up their courtroom fight. The war has been nasty, the evidence so far presented less than compelling, and the wounds inflicted barely worth a trip to the ER. If these companies would only look outside the courtroom they might realize consumers hardly care about their petty squabbling, while rivals must be thrilled their executives have been spending more time in a courtroom than in design rooms. Who's really winning here? While the mainstream press and even many in the trade media provide blanket coverage of the lawsuit over how much Apple believes Samsung should pay for allegedly blatantly copying the rectangular shape of the US-company's iPhone and iPad, or some other design pattern, I have been itching for a return to productive competition by the two combatants. The details of the lawsuit so far have been mind numbing. The story so far seems to amount to no more than the kind of jostling kids in a school yard might get into on a hot afternoon. I can just imagine a teacher trying to resolve the she-pinched-me-first-before-I-kicked-her quarrel. Apple and Samsung may not understand this, but that's how many in the consumer world view what is happening in that California courtroom. Only the stakes are so high for the two companies. I am not referring here to any monetary compensation either party might get. No. They can both handle whatever the jury decides if it awards financial compensation for either party. In Apple's case, it can easily write a check from its more than $100 billion in cash and securities. Also Samsung, which along with its courtroom rival has pocketed most of the industry profits from wireless handset sales, has deep enough pockets to handle the $2.5 billion or so Apple is demanding if the case is decided in its favor. But after the "he-said, she-said" that the two companies have spouted so far in the courtroom they will still both have to return to the market for the real duel for marketshare. Nothing dramatic has so far been revealed in court -- nothing, in any case, that would make consumers believe Samsung has been such a blatant violator of copyright or patent laws that they should shun the company's products. Apple may win the case on legal nuance, but it may lose in the court of public opinion where many are beginning to think the entire legal war is being waged to slow down a competitor rather than because Samsung has been egregious in copying Apple products. Of course, diehard Apple fans will disagree, and others will buy the company's products no matter what noxious fumes have been emitted in the courtroom. I've believed from the beginning that it's the lawyers who will walk away as winners once the dust settles on the patent litigations that have mushroomed over the last couple of years, pitching most of the industry's leading manufacturers against each other. While there's a place for litigation, the evidence Apple has presented so far does not rise to that level, and whatever Samsung will be presenting over the next week as it makes its counter-argument will equally sway very few. Neither can claim ownership of many of the key technologies in wireless communication, and neither is going to win customer patronage by seeking to blunt a competitor's edge in this manner. While writing this article, I thought again of Motorola Mobility Inc. (NYSE: MMI) and Nokia Corp. (NYSE: NOK) and the challenges facing these two companies. They were once leaders in this market, but their current positions tell us where winners are decided. Motorola Mobility is a wounded company; its new owner, Google. announced yesterday the company will be laying off 4,000 employees worldwide in an effort to be profitable. Nokia has announced similar large-scale job cuts. Neither Apple nor Samsung were notable players in this market even 10 years ago when Motorola and Nokia ruled the wireless world. The two emerged from adjacent markets to dethrone the established players. So, here's my blunt message to the two companies: While you fight your silly courtroom wars and take your executives' attention away from the real battlefield, new rivals are plumbing holes in your market and eyeing the huge profits you hauled away last year. They are on your blind side, and you may not even know who they are. They won't win this year or even in the near future, but the profit you are harvesting in wireless is too tempting, and you've opened up a crack for them to explore. Inflict dangerous wounds on each other. It will only help the unknown, maybe even the unborn, rivals.