蘋果反壟斷案 喬布斯"還魂"作證

SAN FRANCISCO — Three years after his death, Steve Jobs is very much a presence in courtrooms across the country.

舊金山——史蒂夫·喬布斯(Steve Jobs)已去世三年，但在很大程度上，人們依然能在美國各地的法庭上感受到他的影響。

And that’s not necessarily good news for Apple.

但對蘋果公司(Apple)而言，這並不一定是好消息。

Next month, the company is set to go to trial in the third major antitrust lawsuit it has faced since Mr. Jobs died. His emails will play an important role in the case, as they did in the last two. But lawyers will probably have to work hard to give his statements a positive spin. The potential damages — around $350 million — are a pittance for a company that in its last quarter had an $8.5 billion profit.

下個月，蘋果公司將出庭受審，這是喬布斯去世以來該公司面臨的第三宗大型反壟斷訴訟。和之前的兩起案件一樣，他的電子郵件將在這起案件中起到重要作用。但代理律師可能必須下些功夫，才能用正面的說辭解釋喬布斯說過的話。此案的賠償金可能高達3.5億美元（約合22億元人民幣），但對於這家上季度盈利85億美元的公司而言，這筆錢不足掛齒。

Executives are often told by their lawyers to be careful what they put in writing for fear it will end up as evidence in a courtroom. Perhaps Mr. Jobs did not get the memo. His emails in past lawsuits — a mix of blunt litigation threats against his opponents and cheery financial promises for potential business partners — have made him an exceptional witness against his own company, even beyond the grave.

律師常常讓企業高管注意書面的內容，原因是擔心它們最後會成爲呈堂證供。或許喬布斯沒有收到過律師的提醒。儘管他已經去世，但在過去的案件中，喬布斯的電子郵件卻讓他成爲了一個重要的證人，只是對自己的公司不利——那些郵件中，既有起訴對手的赤裸裸的威脅，也有對潛在商業夥伴欣然許下的財務承諾。

The emails in all these cases present the good and bad of Steve Jobs — charmer and bully, someone who may not always have played by the rules.

所有這些案件中涉及的電子郵件，呈現出了喬布斯好的一面和不好的一面——時而頗具魅力，時而橫行霸道，而且並不總是按規矩辦事。

He was a “genius in terms of his vision for the future,” said Michael A. Carrier, a professor at Rutgers School of Law. “But it went along with a really healthy ego and perhaps the lack of an antitrust filter — thinking about how these words would appear years later tossed up on the screen in front of a jury.”

“談到對未來的設想，他是個天才，”羅格斯大學法學院(Rutgers School of Law)教授邁克爾·A·卡里爾(Michael A. Carrier)說，“但他同時又真的很自大，可能也欠缺一個‘反壟斷過濾器’。他沒想到多年以後，這些話又會出現在陪審團面前的屏幕上。”

The latest case to bring Mr. Jobs’s spirit into a courtroom is set to begin on Tuesday in Oakland, Calif. It is a class action involving older iPods, which played only songs sold in the iTunes Store, or those downloaded from CDs, not music from competing stores. The plaintiffs are consumers who say Apple violated antitrust law because to keep their music, people had to stay with the iPod, and buy higher-priced ones rather than cheaper, alternative music players. Apple has since discontinued this system.

最近這起讓喬布斯的靈魂走上法庭的案件，定於週二在加州奧克蘭開庭。這是一起集體訴訟，涉及版本較老的iPod。它們只能播放iTunes Store銷售的音樂，以及從CD上導出的音樂，無法播放從對手的商店購買的音樂。作爲原告的消費者稱，蘋果違反了反壟斷法，因爲爲了保留購買的音樂，人們不得不一直使用iPod，購買價格較高的iPod產品，而非更便宜的其他音樂播放器。蘋果已經終止了這一做法。

Mr. Jobs’s emails and videotaped deposition taken before his death, plaintiffs’ lawyers say, will portray him as planning to break a competitor’s product to protect Apple’s grip on digital music.

原告律師稱，喬布斯的電子郵件，以及他去世前錄製的證詞視頻表明，爲了保護蘋果對數字音樂的掌控，他打算搞垮競爭對手的一款產品。

“We will present evidence that Apple took action to block its competitors and in the process harmed competition and harmed consumers,” said Bonny Sweeney, the lead plaintiffs’ lawyer.

“我們將呈上證據，表明蘋果採取了遏制競爭對手的行動，並在此過程中妨礙了競爭，損害了消費者的利益，”首席原告的代理律師邦尼·斯威尼(Bonny Sweeney)說。

Apple declined to comment.

蘋果拒絕置評。

A few of the emails have already been made public. In one, sent in 2003 to other Apple executives, Mr. Jobs expressed concern about Musicmatch, a software company, opening its own music store.

其中幾封電子郵件已被公開。2003年，喬布斯在發給蘋果其他高管的電子郵件中，表達了對Musicmatch的擔憂。這家軟件公司當時要啓動自己的音樂商店。

“We need to make sure that when Music Match launches their download music store they cannot use iPod,” he wrote. “Is this going to be an issue?”

“我們需要確保Music Match在發佈他們的下載音樂商店時，沒法用iPod，”他寫道。“這會成爲問題嗎？”

More emails are expected to become public during the trial.

預計會有更多電子郵件在週二開始的庭審期間被公之於衆。

In this case, the overwhelming impression of Mr. Jobs is likely to be of an aggressive businessman eager to ensure and protect the iPod’s success. In other cases tried since his death, he appears in a far less flattering light — as a ruthless executive willing to strong-arm smaller companies.

在這起案件中，喬布斯給人留下的最主要的印象，可能是一個咄咄逼人的商人，他迫切希望保障和捍衛iPod的成功。在他去世後開庭的其他案件中，也突出了他負面的形象。他給人的印象是一名嚴酷的高管，喜歡脅迫較小的公司。

In 2010, Apple and five other Silicon Valley companies were accused in a class action of conspiring to keep wages down by agreeing not to recruit one another’s workers. The case is set to go to trial in January, after the judge rejected a settlement agreement. Mr. Jobs will be a star witness — or his words will.

在2010年的一起集體訴訟中，蘋果和另外五家位於硅谷的公司被控合謀以不僱傭對方員工的方式，來壓低工資。在法官否決了一項和解協議後，該案定於明年1月進入審判程序。到時候喬布斯又會成爲明星證人，至少他的話又會成爲重要證詞。

Plaintiffs’ lawyers have portrayed Mr. Jobs as a ringleader of the conspiracy, pointing to his emails like one sent in 2006 to Eric Schmidt, a Google executive.

原告律師稱，喬布斯是串通事件中的主謀。律師提到了他的一些電子郵件，其中包括他在2006年發送給谷歌公司(Google)高管埃裏克·施密特(Eric Schmidt)的那封。

“I am told that Googles new cellphone software group is relentlessly recruiting in our iPod group,” Mr. Jobs wrote, according to the court documents. “If this is indeed true, can you put a stop to it?”

法庭文件顯示，喬布斯寫道，“我聽說，谷歌手機軟件新團隊正在連續不斷地從我們的iPod團隊挖人。如若屬實，你能制止此事嗎？”

Mr. Jobs also tried to make a no-poaching agreement with Palm. When a Palm executive rejected that idea in an email, Mr. Jobs replied, “My advice is to take a look at our patent portfolio before you make a final decision here” — a threat to embroil Palm in patent litigation.

喬布斯還嘗試與Palm達成一項防止挖人的協議。當Palm的一名高管在電子郵件否決了這一提議時，喬布斯回覆說，“我的建議是，在你就此事做出最終決定前看一眼我們的專利資產”——這是在威脅要對Palm發起專利訴訟。

In 2012, the Justice Department accused Apple and five other publishers of colluding to raise e-book prices. In the trial, government lawyers showed an excerpt from Mr. Jobs’s authorized biography in which he said he wanted publishers, not retailers, to set the price of titles.

2012年，司法部(Justice Department)指控蘋果和其他五家出版商串通一氣，提高電子書的價格。庭審期間，政府的代理律師出示了摘錄自喬布斯授權的傳記的部分內容。在那部傳記中，喬布斯稱他希望給各類出版物定價的是出版商，而非零售商。

“Yes, the customer pays a little more, but that’s what you want anyway,” Mr. Jobs told the publishers, the biography said.

“是的，消費者多花了點錢，但不管怎麼說，這也是你們希望的結果，”在這本自傳中，喬布斯告訴出版商。

Throughout the trial, government lawyers frequently brought up an email written by Mr. Jobs to a media executive, in which he suggested that by teaming up with Apple, publishers could sell titles for higher than Amazon’s $9.99 pricing for e-books.

整個庭審過程中，政府律師多次提到一封喬布斯寫給某媒體高管的電子郵件，喬布斯在信中暗示說，只要與蘋果合作，出版商就能以高於亞馬遜設定的9.99美元的價格銷售圖書。

“Throw in with Apple and see if we can all make a go of this to create a real mainstream e-books market at $12.99 and $14.99,” he wrote.

“和蘋果合作吧，看看我們能否做成這件事：以12.99美元和14.99美元的圖書定價打造一個真正的主流電子書市場，”他寫道。

A federal judge found Apple liable in the case, and on Nov. 21 approved a settlement in which Apple could begin paying $400 million to as many as 23 million consumers.

一名聯邦法官認定蘋果在案件中負有法律責任，並在11月21日批准了一份和解方案，根據這一方案，蘋果可能需要開始向多達2300萬消費者支付總計4億美元的賠償。

The case involving the iPod has kicked around various Bay Area federal courts for a decade. It is an amalgam of multiple suits, with over 900 filings from lawyers on both sides.

這樁與iPod有關的案子10年來由灣區的多家聯邦法院經手。它是多起訴訟結合的產物，雙方律師提交的文件數量在900份以上。

The jury will hear from some of Apple’s top executives, including Philip W. Schiller, the head of marketing, and Eddy Cue, who oversees iTunes and Apple’s other online services.

陪審團將會聽取一些蘋果高管的證詞，包括營銷負責人菲利普·W·席勒(Philip W. Schiller)，以及負責iTunes等蘋果在線服務的埃迪·庫埃(Eddy Cue)。

Part of the case will involve RealNetworks, an Internet media service that had come up with a workaround to allow songs sold in its store to play on iPods and other media players. In response, Apple in 2004 issued an incensed statement, accusing RealNetworks of hacking the iPod and warning that future software updates might prevent songs sold by RealNetworks from playing on iPods. RealNetworks is not a party in this suit.

該案將涉及互聯網媒體服務公司RealNetworks。該公司曾經使用一個變通辦法，使其銷售的歌曲可以在iPod和其他媒體播放器上播放。作爲迴應，蘋果2004年發表了一份憤怒的聲明，指責RealNetworks對iPod實施了黑客攻擊，並警告說，未來的軟件更新版本將阻止RealNetworks的歌曲在iPod上播放。RealNetworks不是該案的當事方。

Apple’s lawyers are expected to try to show that various iTunes updates were designed to make improvements to its products rather than deliberately cripple a competitor and did not harm consumers.

預計蘋果的律師將設法證明，iTunes的更新是爲了改進產品，而不是故意削弱競爭對手，也沒有損害消費者的利益。

And they will probably point out that the price of iPods have gone down over the years, not up, regardless of what Apple did with its software.

他們可能將指出，無論蘋果對自己的軟件做了什麼改變，iPod的價格過去幾年一直在下降，並沒有提高。