評論
打印
【The Legal Battle Between Apple and Samsung】
This is the VOA Special English Technology Report.
這里是美國之音慢速英語科技報道。
Samsung Electronics has won the latest case in its continuing battle with the American owned computer company Apple over property rights. A court in Japan ruled in favor of the South Korean company last week in a case involving its Galaxy series of smartphones and tablets.
三星電子在與美國蘋果電腦公司的長期知識產權大戰中贏得最新一局。日本一家法院上周在涉及Galaxy系列智能手機和平板電腦的一起案件中裁定支持該韓國公司。
The three-judge panel in Tokyo said the products did not violate the property rights of an Apple patent for organizing music and video across devices. The court also ordered Apple to pay all costs relating to the court case.
在東京，由三名法官組成的小組稱，三星的產品并沒有侵犯蘋果跨設備整理音樂和視頻這一專利的知識產權。法院還判決蘋果支付案件有關的一切費用。
The case is just one of many in the worldwide legal battle between Apple and Samsung.
這只是蘋果和三星全球法律大戰眾多案件中的一件。
Last month, a jury in the state of California found the South Korean company guilty of willfully violating property rights on several patents owned by Apple. The California jury awarded Apple more than one billion dollars in damages.
上個月，加利福尼亞州的一個陪審團裁決該韓國公司在蘋果擁有的多項專利上蓄意侵犯知識產權罪名成立。加州陪審團判給蘋果超過10億美元損失。
The patents include so-called utility patents for Apple’s “pinch to zoom” and “tap to zoom” technology. They also include design patents on the look and shape of the iPhone, and one for the home screen design.
這些專利包括蘋果公司“捏拉縮放”和“點擊縮放”技術這些所謂的實用新型專利，還包括就蘋果外觀和形狀的外觀設計專利，和主屏幕的設計。
Madhavi Sunder is a professor of law at the University of California, Davis. She has also written a new book called “From Goods to a Good Life: Intellectual Property and Global Justice.” She says issues involving design patents are more complex.
Madhavi Sunder是加州大學戴維斯分校的法學教授。她還寫了一本新書，名為“從商品到美好生活：知識產權和全球正義”。她表示，涉及外觀設計專利的問題更加復雜。
MADHAVI SUNDER: “These design patents are much more controversial. And a big question here is isn’t that what market competition is all about.”
MADHAVI SUNDER：“這些外觀設計專利更有爭議。而一個很大的問題是市場競爭是關于什么？”
Professor Sunder says patents are meant to increase competition and support design and development.
Sunder教授稱，專利是為了提高競爭力，支持設計和開發。
MADHAVI SUNDER: “For Apple to say its design -- which becomes a new industry standard, the standard of sleek, cool, modern gadgets -- is something that only one company can have an exclusive right over, this is a real problem. And it raises the real question of whether or not we should be protecting designs with patents in the first place.”
MADHAVI SUNDER：“蘋果公司稱，它的設計已經成為一個新的行業標準，是時尚、酷、現代新發明的標準，只有一家公司可以擁有獨占權？，這是一個現實的問題。它提出了這樣一個真正的問題，我們是否應該把保護設計專利擺在首位。”
She says Apple built its computer company using the same methods that it is now opposing.
她說，蘋果用它目前反對的相同做法建立了自己的電腦公司。
MADHAVI SUNDER: “Steve Jobs, ironically, built Apple’s reputation on the fact that Apple freely took all the best ideas that were out there and tweaked them and modified them to create a better product. He often quoted Picasso who said ‘good artists copy but great artists steal.’ The said thing now is that Apple is saying they can do it but no one else after them can. This goes to the heart of what innovation is about.”
MADHAVI SUNDER：“具有諷刺意味的是，史蒂夫?喬布斯建立蘋果的聲譽是基于蘋果免費采用了所有最好的創意并加以調整和修改從而創造一種更好的產品。他經常引用畢加索的話‘好的藝術家復制作品，偉大的藝術家竊取靈感’。現在說的事情是，蘋果公司說他們可以這樣做，但在他們之后的其他人不可以。這進入了什么是創新的這個重點。”
Samsung said the California court’s verdict, in its words, "should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for American consumers.”
三星稱加州法院的判決用它的話來說就是，“不應該被看作是蘋果的勝利，而應該被看作是美國消費者的損失。”
In a rare memo to its employees, the company said it would continue its fight until its arguments are accepted.
在一份罕見的三星公司給員工的備忘錄中表示，它會繼續斗爭，直到其觀點被接受。
On the same day as the California ruling, a court in South Korea ruled in another case that both Apple and Samsung had violated each other’s patents.
在加州法院裁決的同一天，在韓國一家法院在另一起案件中裁定，蘋果和三星都侵犯了對方的專利。
