Is Apple afraid of Google?

After reading through the avalanche of reactions to Apple's wide-ranging lawsuit filed Monday against handheld vendor HTC, I'm beginning to think that Apple may very well fear the rise of Google. And an indirect legal assault on the eminent provider of Android-powered devices is easier, cheaper, and less risky than a direct attack on Google itself.

What has Apple to lose?

On the one hand, it's somewhat laughable to think that Apple would be afraid of anybody. In less than three years, the iPhone has redefined the smartphone market. Whereas we used to view smartphones as basic phones with e-mail and Web capability, the iPhone has expanded our thinking tremendously. Today's smartphones are full-on application platforms that are rewriting what we can get done while we're on the go. Apple's been at the forefront of this transition, and its continued growth on all fronts -- unit sales, revenue, and platform expansion, among other metrics -- should be enough to inspire confidence in Cupertino that it can easily weather any potential challenger.

On the other hand, it's not too much of a stretch to conclude that Apple has the most to lose if someone else comes along and threatens to steal some of its thunder. And while initial efforts to bring Android-based devices to market were less than impressive (the G1 was about as desirable as a Yugo, and early versions of Android only hinted at the new operating system's potential), Google has since found its groove. Many of the hottest new designs out there are now powered by Android, and the Android Market has staked out a strong second-place in the online app storefront wars.

Which largely explains why it took Apple almost a year-and-a-half after HTC launched its first Android-powered device, to move ahead with its multi-faceted lawsuit. It makes little sense to burn legal resources if the target in question isn't threatening to slice into your market share and revenue. This is probably one of the only small comforts, for instance, that Palm has left: It's too inconsequential at this point to become a target of Apple's wrath.

Letting history serve as guide

Apple has learned the hard way that ownership of intellectual property -- the ability to stake your claim on what belongs to you and you alone -- is critical to its survival. This is especially true in the technology world, where intellectual property is so often intangible, and IP ownership can be so difficult to define. When you fail to leverage control, you run the risk of being leapfrogged.

But that lesson has led Apple down a familiar path, even when that path has led nowhere before. Apple's futile attempts long ago to squash Microsoft Windows continue to guide the company's strategy today. Had Apple succeeded back then in asserting its ownership of key elements of the graphical user interface, today's desktop operating system landscape might look markedly different.

Apple clearly hopes that by playing tough with mobile competitors, it'll set itself up for one of two outcomes: Either it will ink licensing deals with virtually any handheld vendor it chooses to pursue, and in doing so guarantee itself a long-term source of revenue; or in the absence of a partnership or legal victory, its litigation-happy strategies will cast enough of a chill over the industry that competitors are afraid to push too hard lest they find themselves in Apple's crosshairs.

It's this second potential outcome that should give pause to anyone with even a passing interest in the evolution of mobile technology. While Apple has every right to pursue its interests in court to ensure that competitors do not undeservedly profit from its earlier investments, consumers have a similar right to an openly competitive market where players don't first have to negotiate legal minefields before bringing new products and services to market. And left unchecked, Apple's campaign (first Nokia, now HTC) to assert its ownership of every shred of IP related to the iPhone, could slow down the pace of innovation just as compelling and competitive platforms reach critical mass.

If Apple wins, how much incentive will remain for competitors and would-be competitors to throw themselves into the market? Even if it doesn't win, the message has been sent: If you know the lion is out there, you'll likely just stay home.

The Google tangent

I don't see Google staying home anytime soon. The search giant has too much invested in its multi-pronged efforts to grow and expand its level of control over the mobile platforms through which its services are delivered. But unlike Apple and RIM, Google isn't in this fight alone. Aside from its self-branded Nexus One phone (ironically, a product of HTC) it isn't a primary handset vendor. Does it have sufficiently deep pockets -- and resolve -- to keep its Open Handset Alliance together if an Apple victory poisons the waters for its platform partners?

No one really knows how Google will respond to this flanking attack, if it will even respond at all. But it's clear that Apple's campaign against HTC isn't really about HTC at all. Rather, it's targeting key vendors whose size and influence will prompt other competitors to take notice...and take cover. There will be more lawsuits, and resources on both sides that should have gone into developing and marketing innovative products will instead be directed toward funding court costs and lawyers' fees.

Once upon a time, Apple portrayed itself as David to Microsoft's Goliath as it battled the ultimately dominant force from Redmond. A generation later, the world's attention has shifted from PCs and laptops to mobile devices, and Apple now finds itself in the role of Goliath. It knows full well that dominance isn't permanent, and anything that can be done to slow down new entrants should indeed be done. That it continues to let a certain degree of historically entrenched fear guide its actions isn't necessarily a negative thing. Tension, after all, is a great driver of increased performance. But at this level, at this scale, and at this crucial moment in the history of the mobile market, it runs the risk of slamming the industry it helped define into neutral as lesser-endowed players run for the hills.

In that respect, Apple really shouldn't be living in fear of HTC, Nokia, or any other potential competitor. The real fear belongs to consumers like us, and it should be directed back at Apple.

Carmi Levy is a Canadian-based independent technology analyst and journalist still trying to live down his past life leading help desks and managing projects for large financial services organizations. He comments extensively in a wide range of media, and works closely with clients to help them leverage technology and social media tools and processes to drive their business.