What I took away from the quote wash that in personal disputes between individuals, when one individual pulls out a handgun it escalates the dispute to the level of potentially mortal harm. Prior to that level of escalation there could be a knock down drag out fight but it would be perhaps less likely to result in someone dying. Further, when the stakes become 'life or death' because someone has a gun, the responses take on a level of urgency and desperation that they would not have at lower threat levels.

So from the perspective of an analogy, corporations don't have 'blood' they have money, which is an analog for blood. And up to the point where they are arguing about this and that the total amount of money that is at stake is constrained by the companies involved deciding not to do business with each other. But a lawsuit can drain a disproportionate amount of money out of the 'target' (and the instigator). This 'escalates' the problem because what is at risk is higher. And, like an individual, when you threaten a company with more serious damage, their willingness to respond with more harm goes up significantly, if they feel like they are fighting for their life they will do things that normally would be considered 'too risky.'

So as an analog, the handgun and a lawsuit are escalation to the conflict which can result in much greater harm.

You pull the trigger, maybe you miss (Apple not winning the lawsuit), then they pull their gun...

Maybe a better quote or platitude in this case is "don't take out a weapon unless you plan on using it". I always took that to mean, wrt guns, if you take it out, be prepared to shoot to kill.

Apple certainly seems to have done that here. I don't know why though. Ianal, but anyone should be able to look at the date of filing for ifone and compare that to Apple's product launch. Apple lost right there.

Why they went in guns blazing thinking they are going to scare a telco is crazy. And a Mexican telco, which I would bet may behave a little different than US telcos.

I think Apple should have simply kept their mouths shut. I understand you have to protect your trademark, but ones a product, the other a service.

Apple seems to have jumped into a small pool of sharks with the iPhone name. Didn't Cisco have an IP phone called iPhone long before Apple? And as far as I know, Apple made no negotiations with them prior to launch.

I guess when you have enough money in the bank in cash to buy pretty much any competitor, it changes they term competitor in ones mind a bit. I certainly wish they would buy up AT&T and run the company right. 120.00 or more a month for a phone is pushing your luck.

People sometimes shoot back.

You'd be surprised how many people with handguns shoot themselves in the process of trying to intimidate someone else.

So you pull the trigger and kill someone. You get put away for murder for life.

It's more about the unintended consequences of a lawsuit than outright direct effects.

The lawyers for Apple were holding the gun, pointing it in the general direction of both iFone and Apple.