评论
打印
On closer inspection, the bag begins to look decidedly mixed for the tech giant.
经进一步审视发现，对于这家科技巨头来说，这个结果显然是喜忧参半的。
The court did not say it is impossible to show that Apple is an illegal monopolist — only that Epic had failed to do so.
法院并没有说证明苹果是非法垄断企业是不可能的，只是说Epic没能做到。
The judge also found that, contrary to Apple’s protestations, the App Store’s operating margins, which one of Epic’s expert witnesses put at 75%, are “extraordinarily high”.
法官还发现，与苹果的声明相反，App Store的运营利润率“高得离谱”，Epic的一位专家证人认为其利润率为75%。
Most important, Ms González Rogers ruled that although Apple did not violate federal antitrust law, it had engaged in anticompetitive conduct under California’s competition law.
最重要的是，González Rogers女士裁定，尽管苹果没有违反联邦反垄断法，但根据加州竞争法，它已经从事了反竞争行为。
It did so by banning developers from including information in their apps that tells users how they can subscribe or buy digital wares outside the App Store.
苹果通过禁止开发者在应用程序中添加信息以告知用户如何在App Store之外订阅或购买数字产品的方式做到了这一点。
Such “anti-steering” provisions, the judge said, “hide critical information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice”.
法官表示，这种“反转向”条款“向消费者隐瞒了关键信息，非法扼杀了消费者的选择”。
The decision will take effect in 90 days, though Epic has already appealed and Apple may do so, too.
这项裁决将在90天内生效，不过Epic已经提起上诉，苹果也可能会上诉。
The case could end up in America’s Supreme Court. Whatever its final outcome, it will pile more pressure onto Apple to loosen its tight control of the App Store.
这个案子最终可能会交于美国最高法院裁决。无论最终结果如何，这都将给苹果施加更大压力，使其放松对App Store的严格管控。
This could lower its margins and weaken Apple’s services business, which analysts expect to be a big source of growth and profits.
这可能会降低苹果的利润率，削弱其服务业务。分析师预计，服务业务是苹果增长和利润的一个重要来源。
Apple’s share price fell by more than 3% after the verdict was handed down, lopping $85bn off its market capitalisation, three times unlisted Epic’s private valuation.
判决公布后，苹果股价下跌超过3%，市值缩水850亿美元，是未上市公司Epic私人估值的三倍。
Perhaps in anticipation of the verdict, Apple has recently made some concessions.
也许是对判决有所预期，苹果最近做出了一些让步。
On August 26th, in a settlement with app developers, it agreed to allow them to email users about payment methods outside the App Store.
8月26日，在与应用程序开发商达成的一项和解协议中，苹果同意允许开发商通过电子邮件告知用户app Store以外的支付方式。
On September 2nd, in another settlement, this time with Japan’s Fair Trade Commission, it consented to letting apps that provide access to digital content, such as books and music, direct users to other ways to pay.
9月2日，在与日本公平贸易委员会达成的另一项和解中，苹果同意让提供数字内容（比如书籍和音乐）的应用程序引导用户使用其他支付方式。
Apple will also have to comply with a new South Korean law banning app stores, including its own and Google’s, from requiring users to pay using the stores’ payment systems.
苹果还必须遵守韩国的一项新法律，该法律禁止应用商店（包括苹果自己的和谷歌的应用商店）要求用户使用商店内的支付系统进行支付。
The European Union and even America’s polarised Congress have similar laws in the works.
欧盟、甚至是美国两极分化的国会都在酝酿制定类似的法律。
Apple may, just about, be able to claim a victory in the courtroom battle against Epic.
苹果或许能在与Epic的法庭大战中取得胜利。
But the drawn-out regulatory world war is far from over.
但这场旷日持久的监管世界大战远未结束。
译文由可可原创，仅供学习交流使用，未经许可请勿转载。
