喬布斯“鬼魂” 出庭作證

喬布斯的“鬼魂”在蘋果反壟斷案中出庭作證

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(duì)蘋果公司(Apple)而言，這并不一定是好消息。

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(gè)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(dá)3.5億美元(約合22億元人民幣)，但對(duì)于這家上季度盈利 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(yè)高管注意書面的內(nèi)容，原因是擔(dān)心它們最后會(huì)成為呈堂證供?；蛟S喬布斯沒有收到過律師的提醒。盡管他已經(jīng)去世，但在過去的案件中，喬布斯的電子郵件卻讓他成為了一個(gè)重要的證人，只是對(duì)自己的公司不利——那些郵件中，既有起訴對(duì)手的赤裸裸的威脅，也有對(duì)潛在商業(yè)伙伴欣然許下的財(cái)務(wù)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(xiàn)出了喬布斯好的一面和不好的一面——時(shí)而頗具魅力，時(shí)而橫行霸道，而且并不總是按規(guī)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(duì)未來的設(shè)想，他是個(gè)天才，”羅格斯大學(xué)法學(xué)院(Rutgers School of Law)教授邁克爾·A·卡里爾(Michael A. Carrier)說，“但他同時(shí)又真的很自大，可能也欠缺一個(gè)‘反壟斷過濾器’。他沒想到多年以后，這些話又會(huì)出現(xiàn)在陪審團(tuán)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，定于周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(dǎo)出的音樂，無法播放從對(duì)手的商店購買的音樂。作為原告的消費(fèi)者稱，蘋果違反了反壟斷法，因?yàn)闉榱吮Ａ糍徺I的音樂，人們不得不一直使用iPod，購買價(jià)格較高的iPod產(chǎn)品，而非更便宜的其他音樂播放器。蘋果已經(jīng)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，以及他去世前錄制的證詞視頻表明，為了保護(hù)蘋果對(duì)數(shù)字音樂的掌控，他打算搞垮競爭對(duì)手的一款產(chǎn)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(jù)，表明蘋果采取了遏制競爭對(duì)手的行動(dòng)，并在此過程中妨礙了競爭，損害了消費(fèi)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(píng)。

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(fā)給蘋果其他高管的電子郵件中，表達(dá)了對(duì)Musicmatch的擔(dān)憂。這家軟件公司當(dāng)時(shí)要啟動(dòng)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(fā)布他們的下載音樂商店時(shí)，沒法用iPod，”他寫道。“這會(huì)成為問題嗎?”

More emails are expected to become public during the trial.

預(yù)計(jì)會(huì)有更多電子郵件在周二開始的庭審期間被公之于眾。

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(gè)咄咄逼人的商人，他迫切希望保障和捍衛(wèi)iPod的成功。在他去世后開庭的其他案件中，也突出了他負(fù)面的形象。他給人的印象是一名嚴(yán)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，蘋果和另外五家位于硅谷的公司被控合謀以不雇傭?qū)Ψ絾T工的方式，來壓低工資。在法官否決了一項(xiàng)和解協(xié)議后，該案定于明年1月進(jìn)入審判程序。到時(shí)候喬布斯又會(huì)成為明星證人，至少他的話又會(huì)成為重要證詞。

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(fā)送給谷歌公司(Google)高管埃里克·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(jī)軟件新團(tuán)隊(duì)正在連續(xù)不斷地從我們的iPod團(tuán)隊(duì)挖人。如若屬實(shí)，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(dá)成一項(xiàng)防止挖人的協(xié)議。當(dāng)Palm的一名高管在電子郵件否決了這一提議時(shí)，喬布斯回復(fù)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(chǎn)”——這是在威脅要對(duì)Palm發(fā)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(jià)格。庭審期間，政府的代理律師出示了摘錄自喬布斯授權(quán)的傳記的部分內(nèi)容。在那部傳記中，喬布斯稱他希望給各類出版物定價(jià)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(fèi)者多花了點(diǎn)錢，但不管怎么說，這也是你們希望的結(jié)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(gè)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，出版商就能以高于亞馬遜設(shè)定的9.99美元的價(jià)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(jià)打造一個(gè)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(lián)邦法官認(rèn)定蘋果在案件中負(fù)有法律責(zé)任，并在11月21日批準(zhǔn)了一份和解方案，根據(jù)這一方案，蘋果可能需要開始向多達(dá)2300萬消費(fèi)者支付總計(jì)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(guān)的案子10年來由灣區(qū)的多家聯(lián)邦法院經(jīng)手。它是多起訴訟結(jié)合的產(chǎn)物，雙方律師提交的文件數(shù)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(tuán)將會(huì)聽取一些蘋果高管的證詞，包括營銷負(fù)責(zé)人菲利普·W·席勒(Philip W. Schiller)，以及負(fù)責(zé)iTunes等蘋果在線服務(wù)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(lián)網(wǎng)媒體服務(wù)公司RealNetworks。該公司曾經(jīng)使用一個(gè)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。作為回應(yīng)，蘋果2004年發(fā)表了一份憤怒的聲明，指責(zé)RealNetworks對(duì)iPod實(shí)施了黑客攻擊，并警告說，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(dāng)事方。