中國手機(jī)制造商能否跨越知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)障礙成功扎根海外？

????小米在印度的訴訟并非個(gè)案。愛立信也曾對印度企業(yè)Micromax和另一家中國智能手機(jī)制造商金立（Gionee）提出過訴訟。金立手機(jī)近年來在印度的經(jīng)營也相當(dāng)成功。該公司總裁盧偉冰11月份在深圳總部接受筆者采訪時(shí)，提到了他們和愛立信的訴訟案。當(dāng)被問到中國手機(jī)制造商紛紛開拓印度市場，是否是因?yàn)橛《群椭袊粯樱趯＠芾矸矫鏇]有西歐或美國那么嚴(yán)格時(shí)，盧先生打斷了記者的提問，表示“在印度，你是不能回避知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問題的”，并舉出愛立信的訴訟案作為例證。

????小米應(yīng)該也意識(shí)到了這一點(diǎn)。

????多年來，中國的智能手機(jī)制造商缺乏專利已經(jīng)是業(yè)內(nèi)共知的事實(shí)。愛立信在印度的訴訟是小米在中國這一有利的市場邊界之外，首嘗知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)障礙。中國的法院系統(tǒng)在美國公司InterDigital一案中中設(shè)定了非常低的專利使用費(fèi)，而根據(jù)高通公司（Qualcomm）的條款，使用高通公司芯片（幾乎所有公司都是如此）的各智能手機(jī)制造商之間不能互相提起爭端。

????如果小米能夠和愛立信迅速了結(jié)在印度的爭端，那么這一段插曲只會(huì)被當(dāng)作小米全球擴(kuò)張途中掀起的一道波瀾。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：南風(fēng)

????審校：Patti

????Xiaomi’s case in India isn’t isolated. Ericsson ERIC -1.31% has filed suits against Indian-firms including Micromax and a separate Chinese smartphone maker Gionee, which has run a successful business in India for years. Gionee’s president William Lu told me about the case in a November interview at Gionee headquarters in Shenzhen. I asked him if Chinese smartphone vendors had expanded to India because like China, it has a reputation for lax patent enforcement when compared to Western Europe or the U.S. Lu stopped me. “Being in India, you cannot avoid the IP issue,” he said, and offered the Ericsson dispute as proof.

????Xiaomi must have realized the same thing this week.

????The Chinese smartphone makers’ lack of patents has been known for years. Ericsson’s suit in India is the first taste of the IP hurdle Xiaomi faces outside the favorable confines of China, where the court system established low royalty rates in a case involving the U.S. company InterDigital and under Qualcomm’s terms, the smartphone makers don’t file disputes against one another if they use Qualcomm chips (which almost all do).

????If Xiaomi quickly settles with Ericsson in India, the episode might be seen as just a hurdle in Xiaomi’s global expansion.