Tech Genius Who Didn’t Follow the Rules
賈伯斯不愛循規蹈矩
By James B. Steward

If Steve Jobs were alive today, should he be in jail?
如果賈伯斯仍然健在，是否應該坐牢？

That’s the question being debated in antitrust circles after revelations that Mr. Jobs, the co-founder of Apple, who is deeply revered in Silicon Valley, was the driving force in a conspiracy to prevent competitors from poaching employees.
賈伯斯是蘋果公司的創辦人之一，在矽谷備受敬重。在他曾經密謀阻止競爭者挖角的內幕曝光後，反托辣斯圈子最近開始討論這個問題。

According to the first paragraph of the Sherman Antitrust Act, every “conspiracy, in restraint of commerce” is illegal.
薛爾曼反托辣斯法第一段載明，凡「有礙貿易」之陰謀均屬違法。

Mr. Jobs “was a walking antitrust violation,” said Herbert Hovenkamp, a professor at the University of Iowa College of Law and an expert in antitrust law. “I’m simply astounded by the risks he seemed willing to take.”
愛阿華大學法學院教授、反托辣斯法專家賀芬坎普說，賈伯斯「是違反反托辣斯法活生生的例子。他甘冒這麼大的風險令我驚訝」。

The anti-poaching pact was not Mr. Jobs’s only post-mortem brush with the law. His behavior was at the center of an e-book price-fixing conspiracy with major publishers. After a lengthy trial, a federal judge ruled last summer that “Apple played a central role in facilitating and executing that conspiracy.” (Apple has appealed. The publishers all settled the case.)
反挖角協議不是賈伯斯死後與法律過招的唯一案例。他的行為還是與幾家主要出版商合謀為電子書聯合訂價陰謀的核心。經過漫長審理後，聯邦法官去夏裁定，「在促成及執行這項陰謀的過程中，蘋果公司扮演主要的角色」（蘋果公司已上訴，出版商則皆已同意庭外和解）。

Mr. Jobs also figured prominently in the options backdating scandal that rocked Silicon Valley eight years ago. Thousands of options were backdated at both Apple and the computer animation studio Pixar, where Mr. Jobs was also chief executive, to increase the value of option grants to senior employees. An investigation by Apple’s lawyers cleared Mr. Jobs of wrongdoing, saying he didn’t understand the accounting implications. But it concluded that he “was aware or recommended the selection of some favorable grant dates.” Mr. Jobs himself received options on 7.5 million shares, which were backdated to immediately bolster their value by over $20 million. Apple admitted that the minutes of the October board meeting where the grant was supposedly approved were fabricated, that no such meeting had occurred and that the options were actually granted in December.
賈伯斯還在8年前震驚矽谷的股票選擇權追溯醜聞中扮演要角。蘋果與同樣由賈伯斯任執行長的皮克斯動畫工作室，共有數以千計的股票選擇權被追溯，以提高資深員工股票選擇權的價值。蘋果的律師調查後認為賈伯斯並未違法，因為他不知道其中的會計意義。不過他們也說，他「知曉或曾經建議選擇某些有利的授予日期」。賈伯斯本人取得750萬股的選擇權，日期追溯後，價值立刻提高逾二千萬美元。蘋果承認，批准授予的10月董事會紀錄出於捏造，該次會議並未召開，選擇權其實是12月授予。

Five executives of other companies went to prison for backdating options, but Mr. Jobs was never charged. (Other Apple executives eventually settled Securities and Exchange Commission charges and left the company.)
有五名其他公司的高級主管因為追溯選擇權而入獄，賈伯斯則從未遭起訴（蘋果的其他高級主管最後與聯邦證券交易委員會達成和解，並離開蘋果）。

Mr. Jobs “always believed that the rules that applied to ordinary people didn’t apply to him,” said Walter Isaacson, author of the best-selling biography “Steve Jobs.”
暢銷傳記「史迪夫‧賈伯斯」作者艾薩克森說，賈伯斯「始終認為，適用於常人的規則不適用於他」。

“That was Steve’s genius but also his oddness,” he said. “He believed he could bend the laws of physics and distort reality. That allowed him to do some amazing things, but also led him to push the envelope.”
他說：「那是史迪夫的天賦，也是他古怪之處。他自認可以扭轉物理學定律及扭曲事實。這讓他做出些驚人的事，同時挑戰極限。」

Brian Lam, a technology reporter and founder of The Wirecutter website, said that a few antitrust issues hadn’t dimmed Mr. Jobs’s luster in Silicon Valley. Mr. Jobs “didn’t pay much attention to convention, and now more than ever, that’s the culture of tech companies.”
科技記者兼Wirecutter網站創辦人藍姆表示，幾宗反托辣斯案件無損於賈伯斯在矽谷享有的崇高地位，賈伯斯「不太注意常規。這是科技業界的文化，而且現在更甚於以往」。

There’s no way of knowing whether Mr. Jobs would have faced charges. Given his popularity, prosecutors might not have wanted to risk a trial, Mr. Hovenkamp noted. Mr. Jobs probably came closest to being prosecuted in the backdating scandal, but by then he was already known to have cancer.
無從確定賈伯斯生前是否有可能被起訴。賀芬坎普說，他名氣太大，檢方可能不願冒險起訴他。賈伯斯涉及追溯醜聞是最可能遭到起訴的情況，然而他當時已經罹癌。

But why would Mr. Jobs have tried to skirt the law, given how much was at stake? Mr. Isaacson noted that “over and over, people referred to his reality distortion field.” Mr. Isaacson added, “The rules just didn’t apply to him, whether he was getting a license plate that let him use handicapped parking or building products that people said weren’t possible. Most of the time he was right, and he got away with it.”
明知茲事體大，賈伯斯為何還是游走法律邊緣？伊薩克森說：「人們不斷提到他扭曲事實的那一面」。他說：「無論是取得讓他能使用身障停車位的牌照，或者設計人們認為不可能的產品，規則就是對他不適用。多數時候，他是對的，而且總能如願以償。」

原文參照：
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/03/business/steve-jobs-a-genius-at-pushing-boundaries-too.html

Video：James B. Steward on Steve Jobs:
James B. Stewart, columnist for The New York Times, discusses revelations that Steve Jobs was the driving force in a conspiracy to prevent competitors from poaching employees.
http://nyti.ms/1fEKeWn

2014-05-20聯合報/G5版/UNITEDDAILYNEWS 陳世欽譯 原文參見紐時週報八版下