“苹果公司（Apple）诉三星电子有限公司（Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.）一案是很有感染力的诉讼大戏。不过，称它为大戏实属明褒实贬，即虽然很有娱乐性和刺激性，但其影响很浅薄，而且不持久。”

    上述语句是Asymco分析师霍拉斯•德迪乌周二发表的一篇文章的开头，他列出了六个原因，阐述自己为什么不相信诉讼能解决一家科技公司面临的问题：

    1)法律程序耗时长久，往往比诉讼相关产品的生命周期还要长；

    2)法律模糊不清；

    3)世界太大，诉讼判决难以执行；

    4)赔款金额随意性太大；

    5)技术细节极为复杂，令人难以理解；

    6)诉讼成本极为高昂，只有拥有庞大法务团队的公司才能承担得起。

    可是到了文章末尾，德迪乌又意识到了苹果起诉三星（及摩托罗拉与宏达电）的另一项原因——在我眼中这才是真正的原因：传递一种信号。

    “向竞争对手、合作伙伴、顾客和员工发出信号，换句话说，诉讼被用来创造心理上的效果。”

    但是德迪乌认为可以有更好的方式来传递公司的信号——比如通过广告或产品本身。

    可是，苹果需要传递的信号非同一般，不可能靠大打广告实现。

    我认为，苹果起诉三星的真正原因可以在The Loop博客作者吉姆•达尔林普尔8月初、也就是判决之前所发的一篇文章中找到：

    “苹果所做的一切事情都是有目的的，包括这起诉讼，”他在这篇题为《苹果起诉三星的动机》（Apple's motivation for suing Samsung）的文章中写道。

    下面是达尔林普尔的解读：

    毫无疑问，今后几年内的苹果将推出数款设计精巧、或许能颠覆整个行业的产品。

    尽管我们目前都还不知道这些到底是什么产品，以及它们是否会像iPhone和iPad那样具有颠覆性，现在就提前阻止三星符合苹果的最大利益。这可以有效地威慑三星，因为它是众多紧随其后、不断抄袭其产品的公司中最恶劣的一个典型。

    当然，赢得这起诉讼还能阻止其他竞争对手抄袭苹果的设计。

    苹果最新两种变革整个产业的产品——iPhone和iPad，多年来遭到不知羞耻地抄袭。没错，该公司已经损失了大量收入——诉讼中的估计值为25亿美元——但事实告诉我们，对于拥有1,000亿美元左右现金储备的苹果来说，这只是小钱。

    我认为苹果未来的产品将给业界带来巨大的变革，以至于该公司现在就得在三星面前竖起“停”标志。

    这才是苹果起诉三星的动机。

    我觉得这个分析很有道理。

    译者：小宇

    "Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. makes for powerful courtroom drama. Calling it drama, however, is faint praise. It's entertaining and thrilling but the effects are shallow and they don't last."

    So began Asymco's Horace Dediu in a post Tuesday that listed six reasons he has no faith in litigation as a solution to a tech company's problems:

    1) legal processes are glacial, and tend to take longer than the lives of the products being litigated

    2) the law is ambiguous

    3) the world is too big to enforce the results

    4) the financial awards are arbitrary

    5) the technicalities are bafflingly complex

    6) it is so costly only companies with legal hit squads can afford it.

    But in the end, Dediu comes around to what I believe is the real reason Apple (AAPL) sued Samsung (and Motorola and HTC): to send a signal.

    "Signal to competitors, partners, customers and employees. In other words, they are used to create psychological effects."

    Dediu believes there are better ways to send signals -- through advertising, say, or the products themselves.

    But Apple had a different kind of signal to send, one that couldn't be delivered in an ad.

    The real reason Apple sued Samsung, I believe, is the one The Loop's Jim Dalrymple laid out in early August, before the trial began.

    "Apple has a purpose for everything it does, including this lawsuit," he wrote in a piece entitled Apple's motivation for suing Samsung.

    Here's how Dalrymple saw it:

    There can be no doubt that Apple has some clever, perhaps industry changing products in the pipeline over the next few years.

    Although none us know for sure what those products are, if they are truly disruptive, like the iPhone and iPad, it's in Apple's best interests to stop Samsung now. This will effectively cut off the worst offender of companies copying its products in their tracks.

    Of course, winning the lawsuit will also stop all of the other competitors from copying their designs.

    Apple's latest two industry changing products, the iPhone and iPad, have been shamelessly copied for years. Yes, it's true that the company has lost a significant amount of revenue — estimated at $2.5 billion in the trial — but let's face it, that's pocket change for Apple who has $100 billion or so in the bank.

    I believe that Apple's future products are going to change the industry so much, Apple has to put a stop to Samsung now.

    That's Apple's motive for suing Samsung.

    That sounds about right to me.