What if Apple’s attorney’s are just a little bit sharper than AT&T’s?

It’s possible that Apple may have done something interesting with its long term, exclusive contract with AT&T. It’s just a guess, but the guess is driven by AT&T’s announcement of its 3G expansion last week.

What if Apple and AT&T, way back in the early days of the iPhone negotiations, agreed not on a network but on an iPhone nomenclature? For example, the exclusivity extends to the "Apple iPhone" model A1203. AT&T attorneys would be delighted that Apple made this commitment, but might have overlooked the idea that Apple would come out with a new model (iPhone II, 3G) and a new model number that doesn’t qualify under the terms of the long term exclusivity contract.

One day, AT&T woke up, checked their contract, and realized that Apple was going to sell a 3G iPhone all over the world (which they knew) and possibly also in concert with T-Mobile in the U.S (which they didn’t). Of course, Apple would very much like to broaden the appeal of the iPhone even more in the U.S.

So they decided they better get their own 3G network in shape. Fast. Once again, Mr. Jobs outwits a partner, begs forgiveness, and promises that AT&T will sell a boatload of iPhone IIs. But so will T-Mobile.

Alternatively, perhaps, Apple talked AT&T into exclusivity for just the EDGE network -- with AT&T’s blessing -- and convinced them that the iPhone would be so identified with AT&T in the near term that AT&T’s fortunes would rise dramatically. Good enough. On top of that, the far off days of 3G wouldn’t matter anyway since the iPhone would never have enough battery power to work on that network. [With Apple knowing full well that more power efficient hardware in the iPhone II would come along in 2008.]

In either case, Apple said: sign here.

It’s just a conjecture.