PDA

View Full Version : Apple Settles Chinese 'iPad' Trademark Dispute with Proview for $60 Million




MacRumors
Jul 1, 2012, 11:05 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/02/apple-settles-chinese-ipad-trademark-dispute-with-proview-for-60-million/)


Associated Press reports (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/china-court-apple-pay-60m-settle-ipad-case) that Apple and Chinese company Proview Technology have reached a settlement deal that involves Apple paying $60 million for the rights to the "iPad" trademark in China."The iPad dispute resolution is ended," the Guangdong High People's Court said in a statement. "Apple Inc. has transferred $60 million to the account of the Guangdong High Court as requested in the mediation letter."Proview began publicly objecting (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/27/apple-accused-of-ipad-trademark-infringement-in-china/) to Apple's use of the iPad name in late 2010, with the situation eventually escalating to see Proview demanding bans on iPad sales in the country and up to $2 billion in compensation.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/02/proview_logo.jpg


Settlement talks initiated earlier this year reportedly saw Apple offering $16 million (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/05/10/apple-reportedly-offers-proview-16-million-for-ipad-trademark/) to settle the case, but Proview was apparently holding out for a $400 million settlement that could save the company as it seeks to reorganize under bankruptcy.

Apple argued in several court cases that it had acquired the Chinese rights to the iPad name in late 2009 as part of a deal with Proview's Taiwanese arm. That deal, brokered by Apple dummy corporation IP Application Development, reportedly saw the rights to the name transferred in a number of markets around the globe for just $55,000. Proview later claimed that the Chinese rights to the trademark were owned by its Chinese subsidiary and that the Taiwanese arm consequently could not have sold them to Apple.

Article Link: Apple Settles Chinese 'iPad' Trademark Dispute with Proview for $60 Million (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/02/apple-settles-chinese-ipad-trademark-dispute-with-proview-for-60-million/)



brayhite
Jul 1, 2012, 11:06 PM
Now if only these Samsung lawsuits were as simple as $60 million.

I'd "settle" for $60 million, as well.

Lil Chillbil
Jul 1, 2012, 11:07 PM
well thats great for apple

ArchaicRevival
Jul 1, 2012, 11:07 PM
Someone just got awfully rich. I wish I came up with that name lol

lol On a serious note, the last line says it all. Proview tried to find a loophole to kill a cash cow, and Apple lawyers said 'not on our watch you're not!'

KPOM
Jul 1, 2012, 11:08 PM
$60 million is a lot for a trademark troll. I'm guessing Apple will do its due diligence a bit better the next time it acquires a "worldwide" trademark from another company through a surrogate.

Radio
Jul 1, 2012, 11:12 PM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

Kaibelf
Jul 1, 2012, 11:13 PM
Drop dead and ROT Proview.

----------

I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

I personally didn't, because as an adult I have a pad of paper on my desk at all times.

chirpie
Jul 1, 2012, 11:14 PM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

Well, um, not really.

shartypants
Jul 1, 2012, 11:16 PM
No wonder Proview is bankrupt, they are a bunch of idiots.

irDigital0l
Jul 1, 2012, 11:17 PM
Apple just needs to look under its couch for $60 million change.

Then when the new iPhone comes out, it replaces this in about the first hour.

Macman1993
Jul 1, 2012, 11:25 PM
No wonder Proview is bankrupt, they are a bunch of idiots.

Idiots? They just got $60 Million for something they already sold, genius is more like it.

brand
Jul 1, 2012, 11:26 PM
No wonder Proview is bankrupt, they are a bunch of idiots.

There not, they have $60,000,000.

StrudelTurnover
Jul 1, 2012, 11:32 PM
I'm glad I study Asia-Pacific commerce. This will make a great case example.


Proview later claimed that the Chinese rights to the trademark were owned by its Chinese subsidiary and that the Taiwanese arm consequently could not have sold them to Apple.

The One China policy is also different from the "One China" principle (一個中國原則/"一个中国"原則), which is the principle that insists both Taiwan and mainland China are inalienable parts of a single "China".[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-China_policy#cite_note-2)

FrankHahn
Jul 1, 2012, 11:33 PM
I am glad that the case has been finally settled.

I hope that Apple will not transfer the burden of $60 millions onto its customers in China!

cvaldes
Jul 1, 2012, 11:33 PM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

Nice troll.

iZac
Jul 1, 2012, 11:34 PM
Well at least this paves the way for the new iPad to make an official appearance in the ROC now! Hong Kong better reduce their shipments now they're not serving iPad orders for the entire of mainland China.

Rocketman
Jul 1, 2012, 11:36 PM
Since the court and the country are one in the same, I wonder how much of the $60m they keep?

lzyprson
Jul 1, 2012, 11:36 PM
There not, they have $60,000,000.

Preview is in debt to its creditors by $400million. Now they're in debt $340Million.

They are in fact still broke and shouldn't have gotten anymore than 50k from apple. Oh well. At least it's settled.

FlameofAnor
Jul 1, 2012, 11:36 PM
Idiots? They just got $60 Million for something they already sold, genius is more like it.

Hardly, they owe their creditors $400 million. Guess who's getting that money? :p

Proview will shortly cease to exist...... Apple just expedited their demise.

jav6454
Jul 1, 2012, 11:37 PM
There not, they have $60,000,000.

They still require another $340 Million to stop their bankruptcy...


In any case, Apple, has become quick to settle lawsuits (after Steve's death) and has opted for the easy, pay-my-way-out, instead of going-nuclear alternative.

I wonder if Tim is thinking much into the future by avoiding current hassles.

iMikeT
Jul 1, 2012, 11:38 PM
Apple paying these bozos any amount of money is an outrage, an outrage, I tell you, an outrage!

Yeah, I know that Apple can more than afford it but these clowns at Proview made a deal to give up the iPad trademark long before the iPad's release and therefore really don't have a claim to it now. The original deal should have sealed it long ago and these guys deserve nothing.

$60 million because they feel shafted after the iPad's success and for this to go away on Apple's end, pluh-ese! :rolleyes:

bretm
Jul 1, 2012, 11:38 PM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

Nah, but I did laugh when the note looked like an oversized iPhone.

BC2009
Jul 1, 2012, 11:41 PM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

I didn't laugh.

iMikeT
Jul 1, 2012, 11:42 PM
Hardly, they owe their creditors $400 million. Guess who's getting that money? :p

Proview will shortly cease to exist...... Apple just expedited their demise.


Bottom line is that Apple could have used that $60 million in other ways, like building a factory in the USA.


They still require another $340 Million to stop their bankruptcy...


In any case, Apple, has become quick to settle lawsuits (after Steve's death) and has opted for the easy, pay-my-way-out, instead of going-nuclear alternative.


Apple should have gone through with burying these opportunists and left them owing that $60 million.

SoGood
Jul 1, 2012, 11:42 PM
Just glad it's over on a most boring subject matter. Move on everyone!

BC2009
Jul 1, 2012, 11:47 PM
Apple paying these bozos any amount of money is an outrage, an outrage, I tell you, an outrage!

Yeah, I know that Apple can more than afford it but these clowns at Proview made a deal to give up the iPad trademark long before the iPad's release and therefore really don't have a claim to it now. The original deal should have sealed it long ago and these guys deserve nothing.

$60 million because they feel shafted after the iPad's success and for this to go away on Apple's end, pluh-ese! :rolleyes:

I fully agree, but as a shareholder I would rather Apple pay $60M to open up iPad sales in China next quarter than risk $96M in bond money to activate the injunction on the Galaxy Nexus which is 8 months old (ancient in Android years). Only advantage to Gnex injunction is that Apple should be able to get the same injunction on the GS III based on the ruling.

Looking forward to millions of main-land Chinese customers buying the iPad.

Cubeeless
Jul 1, 2012, 11:48 PM
Apple should increase the selling prices of their products in China..

realeric
Jul 1, 2012, 11:48 PM
Crazy. Corrupted chinese judicial system raped Apple.

iVoid
Jul 1, 2012, 11:49 PM
And now Apple, sue the parent company for selling rights to the name that they apparently didn't have the rights to.

For $120 million.

:)

pixelss
Jul 1, 2012, 11:51 PM
$60 million is pocket change for apple.

fitshaced
Jul 1, 2012, 11:58 PM
What a disgusting world we live in when a name costs $60 million. People dying of hunger all over the world.

MikhailT
Jul 2, 2012, 12:01 AM
Bottom line is that Apple could have used that $60 million in other ways, like building a factory in the USA..

Factory to build what? There's not much you can do with $60m. It cost Intel and other fab companies $5-10 billion just to build a state of the art chip foundry.

It cost $ 60 million or more just to get the process started, but Apple'd need to spend $10 or more billion of dollars to start building one factory. Why would they do that when they can just pay less to have others build it for them?

realeric
Jul 2, 2012, 12:07 AM
Bottom line is that Apple could have used that $60 million in other ways, like building a factory in the USA.

Apple could build 100 SMT lines in the USA, which could assemble 70 million iPhone boards per year. :eek:

Edit) For idiots downvoting;
5 machines per line x 20 sec per board = 180 board per line / hour
12 hours effective operation per day x 350 days x 100 lines = 75 million boards per year.
(2 persons for operation per line + 2 persons for assembly per line) x 100 lines = 400 employees.
800 employees for 2 shift x $54000 = $42 millions per year (including electric+water+insurance+401k+...)
$43 millions / 70 million boards = 61 cents per board.

FlameofAnor
Jul 2, 2012, 12:10 AM
Bottom line is that Apple could have used that $60 million in other ways, like building a factory in the USA.





Apple should have gone through with burying these opportunists and left them owing that $60 million.

It's obvious that delaying the introduction of the iPad into China was going to cost Apple a lot more money. It may not have been right to pay them off, but in business, sometimes you have to accept that fairness isn't always the biggest concern.

TimAlia
Jul 2, 2012, 12:16 AM
Nbd. Apple can just win its 60 million back by suing Microsoft for the surface touch cover.

faroZ06
Jul 2, 2012, 12:30 AM
Thieves...

1080p
Jul 2, 2012, 12:34 AM
Pocket change....

sparkie7
Jul 2, 2012, 12:40 AM
TIMELINE:

Jan 2000: Proview Technology Co, Ltd, which is based in the southern city of Shenzhen, registered the iPad trademark. ..the rights to its use in China

Late 2010: [ 10 years later ] Apple's use of the iPad name (in China)

Now, unless Proview had insider knowledge of an "iPad" in the works at Apple, I'd say they had every legitimate right under trademark law to defend their trademark/IP within China.

You want to play (and make bucket loads of money) in someone else's patch? then you have to pay out. And play by their rules.

In the big picture, $60M is peanuts for . Everything is relative.

applebook
Jul 2, 2012, 12:43 AM
Idiots? They just got $60 Million for something they already sold, genius is more like it.

Even idiots can luck into money, especially in this litigious world.

I wonder what they will burn that 60m on?

MartiNZ
Jul 2, 2012, 12:43 AM
TIMELINE:

Jan 2000: Proview Technology Co, Ltd, which is based in the southern city of Shenzhen, registered the iPad trademark. ..the rights to its use in China

Late 2010: [ 10 years later ] Apple's use of the iPad name (in China)

Now, unless Proview had insider knowledge of an "iPad" in the works at Apple, I'd say they had every legitimate right under trademark law to defend their trademark/IP within China.

You want to play (and make bucket loads of money) in someone else's patch? then you have to pay out.

In the big picture, $60M is peanuts for . Everything is relative.

Indeed ... now to set to thinking what apple will be releasing 10 years from now and trademark that ... and not get into mad debt in the meantime :D.

applebook
Jul 2, 2012, 12:44 AM
$60 million is pocket change for apple.

Doesn't change the fact that Proview is a joke, and so are the courts.

sparkie7
Jul 2, 2012, 12:51 AM
Indeed ... now to set to thinking what apple will be releasing 10 years from now and trademark that ... and not get into mad debt in the meantime :D.

I'd be interested to know if ProView had a legitimate trading business using the iPad name. ie. actually marketing and actively selling products/services from 2000 onwards. And had a brand/market presence in China.

Otherwise it could be ruled by some courts in the Western hemisphere at least that its right to legitimacy could be argued. Nevertheless it seems that it was sheer luck/coincidence, or a leak within ? Who knows..

flameproof
Jul 2, 2012, 12:53 AM
No wonder Proview is bankrupt,

Not anymore.

(That comment was wrong. Proview's creditors (Bank of China and MinSheng Bank) are just waiting for the funds to come in)

tech4all
Jul 2, 2012, 12:54 AM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

Nope, didn't laugh.

flameproof
Jul 2, 2012, 12:57 AM
Now, unless Proview had insider knowledge of an "iPad" in the works at Apple, I'd say they had every legitimate right under trademark law to defend their trademark/IP within China.

Sure. And if it was me who did registered the 'iPad' in China I would had done exactly the same. And so would anybody else.

DisMyMac
Jul 2, 2012, 12:57 AM
Corrupted chinese judicial system raped Apple.

You have evidence that bribes were administered?

flameproof
Jul 2, 2012, 12:59 AM
Apple should increase the selling prices of their products in China..

1. Apple will get the 60m back in a day once the iPad 3 comes out in China.

2. A higher price in China means that Chinese people will line up at YOUR Apple store and carry them to China, hence increase delivery time in YOUR country.

charlituna
Jul 2, 2012, 01:00 AM
Apple just needs to look under its couch for $60 million change.

Then when the new iPhone comes out, it replaces this in about the first hour.

Basically yes. Which is probably why they agreed to just settle and be done with this crap. It's still way less than the billions Proview was demanding and they will make it back in a week, two tops just in iPads.

motorazr
Jul 2, 2012, 01:01 AM
I don't care for this type of deal at all.... since proview clearly had no intent on making $60 million from an actual iPad of any sort... but whatever.

At least Apple's lucky enough they've got the cash to settle it and move on!

realeric
Jul 2, 2012, 01:15 AM
You have evidence that bribes were administered?

lol... The trademark had already been sold to Apple in 2009. Chinese now sell it again.

sparkie7
Jul 2, 2012, 01:17 AM
I don't care for this type of deal at all.... since proview clearly had no intent on making $60 million from an actual iPad of any sort... but whatever.

At least Apple's lucky enough they've got the cash to settle it and move on!

But they may have had plans/intent to use the name to sell whatever. Maybe a touchscreen LCD/TV interactive screen for cars and could have made millions from it.

It is one of the top five in the world monitor manufacturers, so does make you wonder if they caught wind of the iPad name before  had a chance to file the paperwork in China for the ™

flameproof
Jul 2, 2012, 01:22 AM
But they may have had plans/intent to use the name to sell whatever. Maybe a touchscreen LCD/TV interactive screen for cars and could have made millions from it.

It is one of the top five in the world monitor manufacturers, so does make you wonder if they caught wind of the iPad name before  had a chance to file the paperwork in China for the ™

Have a look at the Proview iPad:

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/02/22/apple-and-proview-face-off-in-shanghai-court-over-ipad-trademark/

I presume that even the strongest Apple haters will prefer Apple's iPad rather then Proview's.

sparkie7
Jul 2, 2012, 01:25 AM
Have a look at the Proview iPad:

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/02/22/apple-and-proview-face-off-in-shanghai-court-over-ipad-trademark/

I presume that even the strongest Apple haters will prefer Apple's iPad rather then Proview's.

Missed that. Yeah its butt ugly. But still doesn't negate the fact they had prior registration and right to the trademark.

Piggie
Jul 2, 2012, 01:26 AM
What a disgusting world we live in when a name costs $60 million. People dying of hunger all over the world.

Yes, and all Apple could of done, if it wanted was to change the name a little for it's product in a different country.

Like I'm sure we know other manufacturers do on some products, either for copywrite, or meaning of the word in that language reasons.

I'm not saying they should of, buy they easily could of, like others do and not have spent the 60 million.

It was Apple's own choice not to do so.

iMikeT
Jul 2, 2012, 01:29 AM
I fully agree, but as a shareholder I would rather Apple pay $60M to open up iPad sales in China next quarter than risk $96M in bond money to activate the injunction on the Galaxy Nexus which is 8 months old (ancient in Android years). Only advantage to Gnex injunction is that Apple should be able to get the same injunction on the GS III based on the ruling.

Looking forward to millions of main-land Chinese customers buying the iPad.


It's obvious that delaying the introduction of the iPad into China was going to cost Apple a lot more money. It may not have been right to pay them off, but in business, sometimes you have to accept that fairness isn't always the biggest concern.


As a shareholder myself, I trade and currently holding a long position in AAPL, I would have actually preferred that Apple have buried these guys. They would have spent only 1/3-1/2 of that $60 million. Which is still too much considering that Proview sold and gave up any claim to "iPad" long ago.

But you guys do have a point. It is far more important and profitable for Apple to get the iPad selling in China than to drag out this particular case. It's stupid that the Chinese courts sided with Proview to begin with. I just wish they would have lowballed them even more. What ever, Proview is still in the hole for $340 million lol. :D

Let's see how this issue with Samsung unfolds....



Factory to build what? There's not much you can do with $60m. It cost Intel and other fab companies $5-10 billion just to build a state of the art chip foundry.

It cost $ 60 million or more just to get the process started, but Apple'd need to spend $10 or more billion of dollars to start building one factory. Why would they do that when they can just pay less to have others build it for them?


A factory to manufacture their products, durrrrr.

Apple could have used that $60 million towards the purchase and upgrade of abandoned factories in places like Detroit, Michigan. Then put the kind people in the surrounding areas back to work. Jobs are desperately needed here at home if you haven't noticed.

This attitude of finding someone else who can do it for less is the race to the bottom we're suffering in this country.

Laird Knox
Jul 2, 2012, 01:39 AM
I take it you haven't been following the story?

Proview made and sold a device that looked very much like the original iMac. It was called the iPad (Internet Personal Access Device).

Long after Proview stopped selling their iPad an Apple shell company purchased the worldwide rights to the iPad trademark from Proview.

When Proview found out that Apple was the buyer and saw the sales of Apple's iPad skyrocket they said they didn't sell the rights to the iPad in China.

Proview files a lawsuit for $2 billion.

No matter how you slice it, Proview's actions were pretty shady. On the other hand Apple was a bit sloppy in crossing the i's and dotting the t's since this wasn't simply thrown out of court.

In any case it is a good lesson for any business that operates internationally.

TIMELINE:

Jan 2000: Proview Technology Co, Ltd, which is based in the southern city of Shenzhen, registered the iPad trademark. ..the rights to its use in China

Late 2010: [ 10 years later ] Apple's use of the iPad name (in China)

Now, unless Proview had insider knowledge of an "iPad" in the works at Apple, I'd say they had every legitimate right under trademark law to defend their trademark/IP within China.

You want to play (and make bucket loads of money) in someone else's patch? then you have to pay out. And play by their rules.

In the big picture, $60M is peanuts for . Everything is relative.

I'd be interested to know if ProView had a legitimate trading business using the iPad name. ie. actually marketing and actively selling products/services from 2000 onwards. And had a brand/market presence in China.

Otherwise it could be ruled by some courts in the Western hemisphere at least that its right to legitimacy could be argued. Nevertheless it seems that it was sheer luck/coincidence, or a leak within ? Who knows..

But they may have had plans/intent to use the name to sell whatever. Maybe a touchscreen LCD/TV interactive screen for cars and could have made millions from it.

It is one of the top five in the world monitor manufacturers, so does make you wonder if they caught wind of the iPad name before  had a chance to file the paperwork in China for the ™

Missed that. Yeah its butt ugly. But still doesn't negate the fact they had prior registration and right to the trademark.

Sensation
Jul 2, 2012, 01:50 AM
Apple tried to steal the name and got caught, not sure how you can defend such dirty actions.

ownamac
Jul 2, 2012, 01:51 AM
Chinese law. Proview's case in the US was thrown out.

Perhaps simply the cost of doing business in China where this seemingly unfair legal settlement cost could be rationalized against cheap manufacturing there.

Windlasher
Jul 2, 2012, 01:54 AM
I am glad that the case has been finally settled.

I hope that Apple will not transfer the burden of $60 millions onto its customers in China!

YEP - RAISE the price of the iPhone and iPad in China by 10 dollars and they will have that back in no time. Good For Apple.

sparkie7
Jul 2, 2012, 01:58 AM
I take it you haven't been following the story?

Proview made and sold a device that looked very much like the original iMac. It was called the iPad (Internet Personal Access Device).

Long after Proview stopped selling their iPad an Apple shell company purchased the worldwide rights to the iPad trademark from Proview.

When Proview found out that Apple was the buyer and saw the sales of Apple's iPad skyrocket they said they didn't sell the rights to the iPad in China.

Proview files a lawsuit for $2 billion.

No matter how you slice it, Proview's actions were pretty shady. On the other hand Apple was a bit sloppy in crossing the i's and dotting the t's since this wasn't simply thrown out of court.

In any case it is a good lesson for any business that operates internationally.


Nah, haven't been following it.

Are you saying Provie had registered the iPad name worldwide? ie. in many countries around the world, and  bought these out?

Seems to me the paperwork/evidence suggested the iPad TM in China was not sold comprehensively to . Otherwise 's lawyers would be all over it.

Wondercow
Jul 2, 2012, 02:09 AM
I take it you haven't been following the story?

Proview made and sold a device that looked very much like the original iMac. It was called the iPad (Internet Personal Access Device).

Long after Proview stopped selling their iPad an Apple shell company purchased the worldwide rights to the iPad trademark from Proview.

When Proview found out that Apple was the buyer and saw the sales of Apple's iPad skyrocket they said they didn't sell the rights to the iPad in China.

Proview files a lawsuit for $2 billion.

No matter how you slice it, Proview's actions were pretty shady. On the other hand Apple was a bit sloppy in crossing the i's and dotting the t's since this wasn't simply thrown out of court.

In any case it is a good lesson for any business that operates internationally.

Apple had all of their letters drawn correctly. A Hong Kong court had already ruled on this issue; their conclusion was that Proview sold the name to Apple as Apple claimed and that Proview colluded to extort more money from them.

----------

Apple tried to steal the name and got caught, not sure how you can defend such dirty actions.

See above. Perhaps you should educate yourself about an issue before making yourself look like a fool.

----------

Nah, haven't been following it.

Are you saying Provie had registered the iPad name worldwide? ie. in many countries around the world, and  bought these out?

Seems to me the paperwork/evidence suggested the iPad TM in China was not sold comprehensively to . Otherwise 's lawyers would be all over it.

See above.

nervouk
Jul 2, 2012, 02:15 AM
Seems it was just a shakedown all along, by a business owner with a few good connections in the Party, but not good enough to get the full amount he needed to get completely out of trouble.

He'll probably use the $60 million to pay off his debts to those 'good connections' and hope the others aren't resourceful enough to track him down -- or he'll spent the next 100 years at the bottom of a river with a concrete block tied to his neck.

mentaluproar
Jul 2, 2012, 02:19 AM
I can't believe they settled this. Apple was totally in the right here, and could have easily crushed proview.

Laird Knox
Jul 2, 2012, 02:25 AM
Nah, haven't been following it.

Are you saying Provie had registered the iPad name worldwide? ie. in many countries around the world, and  bought these out?

Seems to me the paperwork/evidence suggested the iPad TM in China was not sold comprehensively to . Otherwise 's lawyers would be all over it.

Yes, Apple supposedly bought out the rights from Proview. They obviously didn't do their homework well enough if Proview was able to later say they didn't include the Chinese rights. Up to that point it was a pretty typical business transaction.

----------

Apple had all of their letters drawn correctly. A Hong Kong court had already ruled on this issue; their conclusion was that Proview sold the name to Apple as Apple claimed and that Proview colluded to extort more money from them.

True enough. I was just trying to give the Chinese court the benefit of doubt that there might be some small loophole for Proview to wiggle through. After all, IANAL and I haven't read the contracts.

JayLenochiniMac
Jul 2, 2012, 02:25 AM
The extortion worked.

sparkie7
Jul 2, 2012, 02:30 AM
Apple had all of their letters drawn correctly. A Hong Kong court had already ruled on this issue; their conclusion was that Proview sold the name to Apple as Apple claimed and that Proview colluded to extort more money from them.

The courts in China laugh at Hong Kong. China rules HK, they dictate the rules and with $M's on the table the major players in China call all the shots. Legal or not. Right or wrong.

Since OS-6
Jul 2, 2012, 02:31 AM
Funny how Taiwan is a part of China until it's convenient ( for " China " ) for it not to be !

nervouk
Jul 2, 2012, 02:32 AM
I can't believe they settled this. Apple was totally in the right here, and could have easily crushed proview.

60 million is pocket change to the largest market-cap company in the world; it was probably worth it to make the guy go away quickly.

In fact I'm sure they threw the money on the ground and laughed as they stood around watching him scramble to pick it up, knowing he was still $340 million up the creek.

doboy
Jul 2, 2012, 02:54 AM
At least it's over and Apple can start selling iPad 3 in China. Apple couldn't risk it with the corrupt Chinese court.

louiek
Jul 2, 2012, 02:59 AM
Even idiots can luck into money, especially in this litigious world.

I wonder what they will burn that 60m on?

Judges and other government officials. They sure won't see all of it.

benjo765
Jul 2, 2012, 03:04 AM
$60 million is a lot for a trademark troll.

Pot - iKettle anyone?

Fruit Cake
Jul 2, 2012, 03:18 AM
I think apple have made and wil make a heck of slot more then 60million out of china. Consider it an "investment".

Sensation
Jul 2, 2012, 03:20 AM
Typical Apple thieving scum.

YGAB
Jul 2, 2012, 04:00 AM
Apple just got punked... if the case had taken place in any other market in the world that wasn't deemed the Great Promise Land for Apple, Mr. Cook & co. would not have succumbed so easily to the bullies of Proview and their connections in China.

jacobj
Jul 2, 2012, 04:10 AM
No wonder Proview is bankrupt, they are a bunch of idiots.

There is an element of truth here. However the value of an item is dependent on how much the buyer is willing to pay. In this case Apple were deceitful by hiding their real identify. I understand why they did it: if leaked that they were buying the name the truth re their intentions for a new device would be out. However the consequence of that action was that the actual owner of the name did not have clarity as to the value of their goods.

I have heard it argued that this is tough luck on the seller. However I believe that the recent doings of banks in the UK have shown us that such immorality is not a good thing.

Apple have now paid what the name iPad was probably worth to them before product launch an that seems fair to me.

With regard to them being trolls I am not sure that stacks up. If their intention had been to scam Apple for more money, then why did they sell it for so little to a company that was not Apple as far as they were concerned?

jacobj
Jul 2, 2012, 04:53 AM
At least it's over and Apple can start selling iPad 3 in China. Apple couldn't risk it with the corrupt Chinese court.

Where's the evidence of corruption in. Honest courts. The Chinese authorities have proven to come down extremely hard on corruption in recent years. There are plenty of x governors to prove it.

MacinDoc
Jul 2, 2012, 05:09 AM
There is an element of truth here. However the value of an item is dependent on how much the buyer is willing to pay. In this case Apple were deceitful by hiding their real identify. I understand why they did it: if leaked that they were buying the name the truth re their intentions for a new device would be out. However the consequence of that action was that the actual owner of the name did not have clarity as to the value of their goods.

I have heard it argued that this is tough luck on the seller. However I believe that the recent doings of banks in the UK have shown us that such immorality is not a good thing.

Apple have now paid what the name iPad was probably worth to them before product launch an that seems fair to me.

Standard business practice worldwide to avoid paying more than something is worth. Also, as you say, to prevent revealing the direction of new product development and give corporate spies less of a leg up.

With regard to them being trolls I am not sure that stacks up. If their intention had been to scam Apple for more money, then why did they sell it for so little to a company that was not Apple as far as they were concerned?
Read the evidence presented in the Hong Kong case. Apple's representative (IPAD) approached executives of the mainland Chinese subsidiary, which was registered as the owners of the trademark. Said executives advised IPAD that rights had been transferred to the Taiwanese division, and requested that IPAD meet them in Taiwan to complete the transaction. Proview's Chinese officers, following the transfer of funds and signing of documents, subsequently revealed that Chinese naming rights were never transferred to their Taiwanese subsidiary, so could not have been sold by that subsidiary, for which, coincidentally, they were also officers. So after they stated in writing to IPAD that they had transferred the Chinese naming rights to their Taiwanese subsidiary, which they also managed, they claimed that they didn't know that they didn't transfer those rights from the one subsidiary that they managed to the other subsidiary that they also managed. Either they were clearly intending to mislead, or they were incredibly incompetent. This is why the Hong Kong court ruled that Apple had rightfully purchased all naming rights, and why the case filed in the U.S. was summarily dismissed. Proview's only hope of succeeding in this case was that the Chinese national bank, and by extension, the government of the PRC, was their largest creditor. So they were counting on the fact that the government of the PRC would pressure the court to rule would be in their favor, since it would also be in the government's favor.

I am concerned about the future ramifications of rewarding this kind of shady business practice by Proview in any way, even though the potential loss of sales in China, even during a court case, would far outweigh the amount that Proview was paid. I guess you could say it's part of the price of doing business with China.

ChrisTX
Jul 2, 2012, 05:24 AM
Apple just needs to look under its couch for $60 million change.

Then when the new iPhone comes out, it replaces this in about the first hour.

I was at the Apple store in The Woodlands mall on Saturday and saw about 4-5 people request new Macs in under 5 minutes. If this is the trend at all of their stores, I'm not so sure it would even take them an hour lol :D

G5isAlive
Jul 2, 2012, 05:26 AM
nothing to see here, these are not the droids you want.

looking forward to some good hardware or even software news.

kimlo
Jul 2, 2012, 05:30 AM
I don't comment much and I'm certainly not heart broken that Apple had to pay $60m out of there $100b+ but it's still a joke they had to pay $60m for a name they already bought out.

jacobj
Jul 2, 2012, 05:43 AM
Standard business practice worldwide to avoid paying more than something is worth. Also, as you say, to prevent revealing the direction of new product development and give corporate spies less of a leg up.

Read the evidence presented in the Hong Kong case. Apple's representative (IPAD) approached executives of the mainland Chinese subsidiary, which was registered as the owners of the trademark. Said executives advised IPAD that rights had been transferred to the Taiwanese division, and requested that IPAD meet them in Taiwan to complete the transaction. Proview's Chinese officers, following the transfer of funds and signing of documents, subsequently revealed that Chinese naming rights were never transferred to their Taiwanese subsidiary, so could not have been sold by that subsidiary, for which, coincidentally, they were also officers. So after they stated in writing to IPAD that they had transferred the Chinese naming rights to their Taiwanese subsidiary, which they also managed, they claimed that they didn't know that they didn't transfer those rights from the one subsidiary that they managed to the other subsidiary that they also managed. Either they were clearly intending to mislead, or they were incredibly incompetent. This is why the Hong Kong court ruled that Apple had rightfully purchased all naming rights, and why the case filed in the U.S. was summarily dismissed. Proview's only hope of succeeding in this case was that the Chinese national bank, and by extension, the government of the PRC, was their largest creditor. So they were counting on the fact that the government of the PRC would pressure the court to rule would be in their favor, since it would also be in the government's favor.

I am concerned about the future ramifications of rewarding this kind of shady business practice by Proview in any way, even though the potential loss of sales in China, even during a court case, would far outweigh the amount that Proview was paid. I guess you could say it's part of the price of doing business with China.

My house is worth £120k bricks, mortar and fixtures. The market value is £450k because that is what the market is willing to pay. That value is held up by the desire for people to own their house. The iPad name was worth more to apple than it initially paid and any seller that had the right and knew they were selling to Apple would have known that.

You point out their incompetence at transferring the rights and I think you are correct. However we have all benefited from a screw up at some point. In this case they had an opportunity to revisit the sale knowing the true identity of the buyer. The initial claim was too high, but I believe Apple has paid what the name was worth pre launch. It is a billion dollar trademark now.

Gasu E.
Jul 2, 2012, 05:47 AM
$60 million is a lot for a trademark troll. I'm guessing Apple will do its due diligence a bit better the next time it acquires a "worldwide" trademark from another company through a surrogate.

Apple made the mistake of assuming it was working within the rules of a conventional legal framework. Once the dispute moved to China, all bets were off.

needfx
Jul 2, 2012, 05:49 AM
Proview hustled $60M, not a bad loot!

gnasher729
Jul 2, 2012, 05:50 AM
There not, they have $60,000,000.

Their debtors will get $60 million. Proview is bankrupt.


I have heard it argued that this is tough luck on the seller. However I believe that the recent doings of banks in the UK have shown us that such immorality is not a good thing.

Apple could have decided to call the iPad "iPod XL" in all the countries where they cannot get the iPad trademark, and the trademark would have been worth nothing.


I presume that even the strongest Apple haters will prefer Apple's iPad rather then Proview's.

The strongest Apple haters clearly won't! They have the chance of buying something called "iPad" without buying an Apple product, surely they will jump at the chance!


In any case, Apple, has become quick to settle lawsuits (after Steve's death) and has opted for the easy, pay-my-way-out, instead of going-nuclear alternative.

The one time in my life I had to talk to a lawyer, he told me "I've won cases where I was sure I should have lost, and I've lost cases where I was sure I should have won. Once you're in court, anything can happen".

Thunderhawks
Jul 2, 2012, 05:54 AM
Apple could build 100 SMT lines in the USA, which could assemble 70 million iPhone boards per year. :eek:

Edit) For idiots downvoting;
5 machines per line x 20 sec per board = 180 board per line / hour
12 hours effective operation per day x 350 days x 100 lines = 75 million boards per year.
(2 persons for operation per line + 2 persons for assembly per line) x 100 lines = 400 employees.
800 employees for 2 shift x $54000 = $42 millions per year (including electric+water+insurance+401k+...)
$43 millions / 70 million boards = 61 cents per board.

Nice try . No need to downvote.

You do know that the iphone has a few more components than boards?

Would we then transport the US made boards to China, Brazil or where do they get assembled?

If you follow the logistics about producing millions of electronic devices in USA that have been discussed in many ways, you would know that there are not enough workers available in the US to do the type of production tech companies need. (Not just Apple).

There aren't enough engineers in the US (Hello, education, no child left behind)
There aren't enough people in one city/area in the US to do what Asia does.
(NY Times article and these guys are not Apple friendly)

There were TV reports about Apple factory productions where this was brought up.

This is not even about higher prices US production would cause (actually, not necessarily true)

Do yourself a favor and read up on this (Plenty of info available), instead of repeating uninformed patriotic statements.

kalsta
Jul 2, 2012, 06:01 AM
I don't comment much and I'm certainly not heart broken that Apple had to pay $60m out of there $100b+ but it's still a joke they had to pay $60m for a name they already bought out.

The story, like so many other legal stories, is sad—and it has nothing to do with how much money Apple has. It's about companies (and sometimes individuals) profiteering from the legal system.

Some people just want a fair, just and reasonable outcome from the legal system—that's what it's supposed to be there for. I know personally of people who bear serious and permanent injury due to government negligence, and friends whose whole livelihood has been ruined by one faulty product in their supply chain—and these people are bled dry (emotionally and/or financially) as the legal cases wear on for years, and years (and the only real winners are the lawyers). Then you hear of a case like this where an opportunistic company walks away with an easy 60 million because they saw an opportunity to screw a bigger company—nothing more. I don't find any of this amusing. It's just sad.

user418
Jul 2, 2012, 06:03 AM
Both sides should have done their due diligence from the very beginning. It doesn't appear the settlement will save Proview nor will it bankrupt Apple.

No matter how much currency one has, I just can't find it in my heart to call $60,000,000 pocket change.

Shakespeare>1594>Henry VI (Part 2)>Act 4 Scene2>"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers".

kalsta
Jul 2, 2012, 06:10 AM
The one time in my life I had to talk to a lawyer, he told me "I've won cases where I was sure I should have lost, and I've lost cases where I was sure I should have won. Once you're in court, anything can happen".

There it is right there—an admission that the system is screwed from one who profits by it.

No matter how much currency one has, I just can't find it in my heart to call $60,000,000 pocket change.

Right. 60 million is 60 million. You can do a lot of good and noble things with 60 million.

----------

Anyway, the good news from this outcome is that we can hope never again to see the Proview logo on the MacRumors homepage. Please??

clibinarius
Jul 2, 2012, 06:25 AM
$60 million is a lot for a trademark troll. I'm guessing Apple will do its due diligence a bit better the next time it acquires a "worldwide" trademark from another company through a surrogate.

They'd only have been a trademark troll if Apple wasn't so secretive and they beat them to the name after it was clear that Apple should own it.

AR999
Jul 2, 2012, 06:37 AM
And now Apple, sue the parent company for selling rights to the name that they apparently didn't have the rights to.

For $120 million.

:)

But thats pure fantasy. By the way, the amount you sue someone for isn't supposed to be a number you pull out of your ass, it needs to be justified.

SpyderBite
Jul 2, 2012, 06:39 AM
Right. 60 million is 60 million. You can do a lot of good and noble things with 60 million.

Unless you owe somebody else more than 5x that amount. Then it is not your money to do good or noble things with.

jacobj
Jul 2, 2012, 06:42 AM
Apple could have decided to call the iPad "iPod XL" in all the countries where they cannot get the iPad trademark, and the trademark would have been worth nothing.


They could have done, but given that Apple TV is almost certainly not iTV due to one trademark issue in one country, Apple have demonstrated that a global brand name is important to them. This happened pre sale a well.

My point is not that the trademark is worth $60m, simply the seller did not know the value of their item because the buyer hid from view and in so doing deceived the buyer (not necessarily with the intention to deceive so as to attain a lower price). To argue that deception is fair because it stops the buyer from overvaluing the product is a vacuous statement because the buyer will not purchase above its real value in these situations. The reality is that to withhold the info intentionally can only be done with the intend to suck in the seller. This happened here due to circumstance in my opinion. If it had been intentional then I would have to argue the case that it was extremely immoral.

Mercedes add a premium on a product because of an intangible value given to it by the perception of the buyer. We accept that and do not generally scorn it. This is my main point regarding its value.

If I own a Ming vase but do not know it and a buyer approaches me to say they want it, knowing what it is, but not sharing
that info, then they deceived me. There is no way to argue that they're actions are acceptable as morality has to be capability agnostic and therefore cannot blame the seller for not knowing or knowing that they should find out.

gnasher729
Jul 2, 2012, 06:59 AM
They could have done, but given that Apple TV is almost certainly not iTV due to one trademark issue in one country, Apple have demonstrated that a global brand name is important to them. This happened pre sale a well.

My point is not that the trademark is worth $60m, simply the seller did not know the value of their item because the buyer hid from view and in so doing deceived the buyer (not necessarily with the intention to deceive so as to attain a lower price). To argue that deception is fair because it stops the buyer from overvaluing the product is a vacuous statement because the buyer will not purchase above its real value in these situations. The reality is that to withhold the info intentionally can only be done with the intend to suck in the seller. This happened here due to circumstance in my opinion. If it had been intentional then I would have to argue the case that it was extremely immoral.

The trademark had very little inherent value. That's demonstrated by the fact that Apple can by a simple decision change the value to zero. And what you don't seem to realise is that the first sale happened _before_ Apple released the iPad, so not only could Apple have picked a different name in China, but they could have picked a different name everywhere.


If I own a Ming vase but do not know it and a buyer approaches me to say they want it, knowing what it is, but not sharing
that info, then they deceived me. There is no way to argue that they're actions are acceptable as morality has to be capability agnostic and therefore cannot blame the seller for not knowing or knowing that they should find out.

The Ming vase has an inherent value. The trademark has no inherent value; if Apple decided that they don't want the name, the value would be practically zero.

Abazigal
Jul 2, 2012, 07:06 AM
I am glad that the case has been finally settled.

I hope that Apple will not transfer the burden of $60 millions onto its customers in China!

DO they even need to? Their profit margins on those things are way over 9000!!!!

If anything, they probably don't need to spend charges on freight exporting those stuff, so that's even more cost savings there. :p

kalsta
Jul 2, 2012, 07:18 AM
Unless you owe somebody else more than 5x that amount. Then it is not your money to do good or noble things with.

Indeed. 60 million is 60 million. And a 400 million black hole is a 400 million black hole. The point is, 60 million isn't a trivial settlement.

yg17
Jul 2, 2012, 07:23 AM
Poetic justice for a company who has sued a German cafe (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8858333/Apple-takes-on-German-cafe-over-logo.html), an Australian grocery store (http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/05/apple-woolworths-in-australian-trademark-dispute-media-in-hys/), and a Chinese food maker (http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20102071-71/apple-objects-to-chinese-food-makers-logo-report-says/) over logos that look nothing like the Apple logo.

carmenodie
Jul 2, 2012, 07:27 AM
TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lawyers are nasty, Apple(behind the scenes) is nasty, big business is nasty....
TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN LIKE HELL!!!!!!

Nungster
Jul 2, 2012, 07:37 AM
$60 million is a lot for a trademark troll. I'm guessing Apple will do its due diligence a bit better the next time it acquires a "worldwide" trademark from another company through a surrogate.

It is alot! But when you have the big red dragon backing you up, you can expect more than the "fair market value" for trademarks.

GenesisST
Jul 2, 2012, 07:39 AM
There not, they have $60,000,000.

+1, but...

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling

tdream
Jul 2, 2012, 07:48 AM
A factory to manufacture their products, durrrrr.

Apple could have used that $60 million towards the purchase and upgrade of abandoned factories in places like Detroit, Michigan. Then put the kind people in the surrounding areas back to work. Jobs are desperately needed here at home if you haven't noticed.

This attitude of finding someone else who can do it for less is the race to the bottom we're suffering in this country.

Apple don't manufacture anything in the US, durrrrr. They only assemble, and by assemble, it means putting it in a nice box, not anything technical.

The attitude you find so despicable is the exact same attitude Steve Jobs and everyone in the executive boardroom have. Not to mention 95% of the Fortune 500 companies, all manufacture abroad, durrrrr.

Chupa Chupa
Jul 2, 2012, 07:49 AM
Bottom line is that Apple could have used that $60 million in other ways, like building a factory in the USA.

That wasn't Apple's last $60m. If it wanted to resume production in the U.S. it still has the means. This is pocket change for Apple. It settled this nuisance suit b/c it wants to keep Sino relations good.

Ecoh
Jul 2, 2012, 07:50 AM
But thats pure fantasy. By the way, the amount you sue someone for isn't supposed to be a number you pull out of your ass, it needs to be justified.

$120 million is the amount Apple originally paid for the use of the iPad trademark.

Kurwenal
Jul 2, 2012, 07:53 AM
Indeed. 60 million is 60 million. And a 400 million black hole is a 400 million black hole. The point is, 60 million isn't a trivial settlement.

True, the amount is not trivial, but this still seems like a good result for Apple. $60M is a rounding error on the financials and the only upside for Apple in this case -- being able to use the iPad TM in China -- is what they got from the settlement. No doubt $60M is far less than the cost to Apple of having to have, use and market a separate name for the product just in China, including both out-of-pocket costs and dilution of the iPad brand.

Apple Corps
Jul 2, 2012, 07:57 AM
There not, they have $60,000,000.

Not really - they are heavily indebted and the Apple settlement is headed to pay off some of their debts.

Technarchy
Jul 2, 2012, 08:02 AM
At least this chapter is finished and Apple can move on. Though I do agree that Apple should do a small markup in China to offset the cost.

Say $2-5 per iPad and iPhone for a few months. Apple is still a business and $60 million is still a lot of money.

jacobj
Jul 2, 2012, 08:02 AM
The trademark had very little inherent value. That's demonstrated by the fact that Apple can by a simple decision change the value to zero. And what you don't seem to realise is that the first sale happened _before_ Apple released the iPad, so not only could Apple have picked a different name in China, but they could have picked a different name everywhere.

you are missing my point. Apple clearly prefer worldwide trademarks and were unlikely to launch with a different name in one country. They could have chosen a different name, but their commitment to iPad as the name was never tested due to the deceit. we can never know the real pre launch value because if this.


The Ming vase has an inherent value. The trademark has no inherent value; if Apple decided that they don't want the name, the value would be practically zero.

A Ming vase is a piece of painted porcelain, no more. £15 is its core value. Fashion and sympathies change as any antique dealer will tell you. We are in an era the conserves historical items. This has not always been the case and may not always be so. Changes can and do occur: the Buddhist statues in afghanistan had no value to the Taliban and were destroyed. A Ming vase finding itself in a similar situation has no inherent value.

Gasu E.
Jul 2, 2012, 08:04 AM
If I own a Ming vase but do not know it and a buyer approaches me to say they want it, knowing what it is, but not sharing
that info, then they deceived me. There is no way to argue that they're actions are acceptable as morality has to be capability agnostic and therefore cannot blame the seller for not knowing or knowing that they should find out.

One of the more bizarre arguments I've ever heard, as you just argued against the the basic rationale for commerce. Not "capitalism", but commerce itself, the actually trading of goods and services between parties that has been going on for tens of thousands of years. Commerce only happens because the buyer values something more than the seller. If the buyer were morally required to reveal to the seller why he valued it more, and the seller were able to jack the price up to capture the additional value for himself, commerce would not happen.

Kurwenal
Jul 2, 2012, 08:06 AM
A Ming vase finding itself in a similar situation has no inherent value.

Unless it is called the iMing vase... :D

nick_elt
Jul 2, 2012, 08:17 AM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

whos laughing now????

akbarali.ch
Jul 2, 2012, 08:21 AM
Apple paying these bozos any amount of money is an outrage, an outrage, I tell you, an outrage!

Yeah, I know that Apple can more than afford it but these clowns at Proview made a deal to give up the iPad trademark long before the iPad's release and therefore really don't have a claim to it now. The original deal should have sealed it long ago and these guys deserve nothing.

$60 million because they feel shafted after the iPad's success and for this to go away on Apple's end, pluh-ese! :rolleyes:

yeah, 55k for the entire world and 60mn for just China...i guess it should've been another 1000 dollars to get it...Proview Losers go buy some tissues off it rub where sun doesn't shine...at all.

nick_elt
Jul 2, 2012, 08:22 AM
$120 million is the amount Apple originally paid for the use of the iPad trademark.

Ive only ever seen that they paid proview 50k? no?

djgamble
Jul 2, 2012, 08:29 AM
I'm glad I study Asia-Pacific commerce. This will make a great case example.

I think it's basically a case of there are no laws. The Chinese government saw that a small Chinese company was legally tricked into selling something for let's be honest... more than it's worth. Some nobody's got $50k for a name they didn't even make, that doesn't relate to THE iPad. DONE. China's poor and that's 500% your average Chinese salary...

Enter the politics. Chinese government/court said "we can make money out of this... behind closed doors tell Apple's lawyers that THERE IS NO LAW... they will lose more than $60 million if they challenge... so just give us $60 million... NOW!!!!"

Business in China is worth more than $60 million a year for Apple so they agreed. Stupid because now it will happen EVERY TIME the Chinese government wants to tax rich foreign companies who try to do business in China. Why? Because they make the rules and can't lose on home turf... or so they think...

gnasher729
Jul 2, 2012, 08:30 AM
A Ming vase is a piece of painted porcelain, no more. £15 is its core value. Fashion and sympathies change as any antique dealer will tell you. We are in an era the conserves historical items. This has not always been the case and may not always be so. Changes can and do occur: the Buddhist statues in afghanistan had no value to the Taliban and were destroyed. A Ming vase finding itself in a similar situation has no inherent value.

It has an inherent value because there are hundreds of museums that will give you good money for it. An item of no "inherent" value except to you would be irreplaceable photos of your family. Imagine you are on a flea market, and someone is selling lots of old black and white photos, for ten pence each. And you recognise that among these photos there are the long lost photos of your grand grandparents that you would be willing to pay $1000 for. How much would you pay? Would you tell him? Would you run the risk that the seller gets greedy and wants $2,000, which you don't have, so you can't even get the photos?


One of the more bizarre arguments I've ever heard, as you just argued against the the basic rationale for commerce. Not "capitalism", but commerce itself, the actually trading of goods and services between parties that has been going on for tens of thousands of years. Commerce only happens because the buyer values something more than the seller. If the buyer were morally required to reveal to the seller why he valued it more, and the seller were able to jack the price up to capture the additional value for himself, commerce would not happen.

No, there is a difference here. The iPad trademark has only value because Apple wants it. Your wedding ring probably has some value, but _to you_ it probably has ten times more value than to a thief. Or lets say your wedding ring is ten times worth more to you than mine, and vice versa. So the seller doesn't lose out; there is nobody except that one buyer who would pay for the item. The Ming vase is different; it has value except that the seller might not know.

Limboistik
Jul 2, 2012, 08:33 AM
This is pure extortion from Proview, and they are lucky that Apple decided to pay them out and walk. The only reason they would settle isn't because they didn't have the paperwork, they technically do own the rights to iPad, as proven in the HK court and US court. They are most likely in a rush to get the iPad to market in China for this quarter instead of dragging out this case indefinitely, costing potentially more damage to sales.

I guess that may prove to be a lack of confidence from Apple in the abilities of the Chinese courts to speed up the judicial process, and decided to just end it.

lkrupp
Jul 2, 2012, 08:42 AM
I am glad that the case has been finally settled.

I hope that Apple will not transfer the burden of $60 millions onto its customers in China!

Apple will "transfer the burden" to ALL of its customers. Where do you think that $60 million came from on the first place? It didn't grown on a tree. Do you not understand how business works?

----------

What a disgusting world we live in when a name costs $60 million. People dying of hunger all over the world.

The world has never been anything else but disgusting. Nothing has changed in the history of civilization. It's why most of us believe in a better life after death. So what's your point?

christophermdia
Jul 2, 2012, 08:44 AM
I would charge China a hefty premium on the new ipad to make up its loss. Even though $60M is not a lot in Apple's terms, a premium pricing will prevent this from happening again.

yoyoma1992
Jul 2, 2012, 08:54 AM
Bottom line is that Apple could have used that $60 million in other ways, like building a factory in the USA.





Apple should have gone through with burying these opportunists and left them owing that $60 million.


I think that would cost more than $60mil....and apple isn't building one is the USA not cause they don't have the money, it's cause they don't wana...

----------

I would charge China a hefty premium on the new ipad to make up its loss. Even though $60M is not a lot in Apple's terms, a premium pricing will prevent this from happening again.

Lol they already do...iPad cost a crapload of money in china apparently (even after exchange rates)

FakeWozniak
Jul 2, 2012, 08:59 AM
Idiots? They just got $60 Million for something they already sold, genius is more like it.

They are idiots. The corrupt Chinese COMMUNIST/SOCIALIST government got them $60M. Proview will just piss it away again. This was protection money Apple had to pay. There will be other opportunities to get donkey raped again by China. When the cost of cloning, unfounded lawsuits, etc gets high enough, Apple will be manufacturing domestically again.

----------

TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lawyers are nasty, Apple(behind the scenes) is nasty, big business is nasty....
TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN LIKE HELL!!!!!!

You must have zero net worth. I bet you don't know what net worth means.

iRobby
Jul 2, 2012, 09:00 AM
Proview's $60M iPad payout called a 'thuggish' win over Apple

By Sam Oliver

Published: 08:15 AM EST (05:15 AM PST)

The $60 million settlement paid by Apple for use of the "iPad" name has been a hot topic in China, with a number of users online calling Proview's tactics a "thuggish" way to earn a payout.

China's widespread online reaction to the Proview settlement was captured on Monday by The Wall Street Journal, which noted the word "thug" was a common word choice among popular social networking sites in China like Sina Weibo. "Intellectual property awareness is something to be supported, but Proview is definitely guilty of playing the thug," user "Gosipier" wrote.

Other users joked that Proview's $60 million settlement could prompt others to begin registering various Apple-like "iProduct" names in hopes of getting their own eventual settlement. But Proview made its own product called the "iPAD," or Internet Personal Access Device," beginning in the late '90s.

Many users expressed excitement over the settlement, hoping that the resolution of the dispute between Apple and Proview could lead to the release of the latest third-generation iPad in China. The new iPad was granted regulatory approval by the government in China in late March, but it has yet to go on sale.

China has become a very important part of Apple's business in recent years, as the nation now leads the world in iOS device activations. Last year, the region was the second-largest market for Apple, behind only the U.S.

The Guangdong High People's Court announced that Apple had reached an agreement with Proview to pay $60 million for the rights to the Chinese iPad trademark on Sunday. Earlier reports suggested Proview was seeking $400 million for the iPad trademark, and the company was said to have turned down a $16 million settlement offer from Apple.b

surf2snow1
Jul 2, 2012, 09:05 AM
Next up for Apple's legal team: suing the Taiwanese arm of ProView to get the 60 million back for fraud.

wgnoyes
Jul 2, 2012, 09:06 AM
Huh! Since the chinese government is so quick to point out that there is only one china and that taiwan is part of it, I should think the case could be made that the taiwan branch of Proview is a part of the whole and therefore Proview DID in fact make that $55,000 deal. But course, looks whose court the case would be argued in.

Veinticinco
Jul 2, 2012, 09:19 AM
Apple paying these bozos any amount of money is an outrage, an outrage, I tell you, an outrage!

Yeah, I know that Apple can more than afford it but these clowns at Proview made a deal to give up the iPad trademark long before the iPad's release and therefore really don't have a claim to it now. The original deal should have sealed it long ago and these guys deserve nothing.

$60 million because they feel shafted after the iPad's success and for this to go away on Apple's end, pluh-ese! :rolleyes:

Quite. It also sets a precedent, a statement of intent that Apple legal counsel will settle even the most vexatious of claims.

Me? Faced with this part-blackmail part-fishing trip, not least from a company that's facing bankruptcy proceedings, I'd have fired up the legal juggernaut, bogged this down in so much paperwork it would be coming out of their lawyers' rear ends, and sat back waiting for Proview (and thus, their claim) to gasp its last breath and expire.

It's become a cliche on MR I know, but in this case I feel it's true. Wouldn't happen under Jobs' watch.

lixuelai
Jul 2, 2012, 09:21 AM
Funny how Taiwan is a part of China until it's convenient ( for " China " ) for it not to be !

Just FYI even though Hong Kong has been under Chinese jurisdiction for nearly 15 years the legal systems are still separate.

As for this case if the Chinese government really wanted to extort some money from Apple it wouldn't have been settled for $60m. $60m is like how much a high level bureaucrat embezzles a year.

Also the HK and US ruling has nothing to do with China. The main argument in the Chinese case was that the Taiwan company did not have the right to sell the trademark directly bypassing its subsidiary when its subsidiary in China was the actual legal owner of said trademark for use within China. On the other hand in the US case the argument was that Apple deceived ProView into selling an asset for significantly less than how much it was worth. That second argument was probably applied in the HK court as well.

bobinhell
Jul 2, 2012, 09:38 AM
There is an element of truth here. However the value of an item is dependent on how much the buyer is willing to pay. In this case Apple were deceitful by hiding their real identify. I understand why they did it: if leaked that they were buying the name the truth re their intentions for a new device would be out. However the consequence of that action was that the actual owner of the name did not have clarity as to the value of their goods.


You are basically saying that if one day you come to own 100M USD, then it would be fair for you to be charged 10 times the price every time you eat in a restaurant? Next time you try to buy a house why don't you tell the real estate agent your yearly income and the max price you are willing to pay? Do you think he'll give you a fair deal? Ha ha ha!

Oh and by the way, you know nothing about finance: the value of something is not what one party is willing to buy it at (or sell it at). The value is what both parties are willing to *trade* it at. Like on the stock market. Apple and ProView agreed to *trade* the iPad trademark at 50K USD. That's the value of the trademark at that time. As far as Apple was concerned they iPad could have never been produced or could have been at total flop. You should you get yourself educated before you speak.

lzyprson
Jul 2, 2012, 09:58 AM
I fully agree, but as a shareholder I would rather Apple pay $60M to open up iPad sales in China next quarter than risk $96M in bond money to activate the injunction on the Galaxy Nexus which is 8 months old (ancient in Android years). Only advantage to Gnex injunction is that Apple should be able to get the same injunction on the GS III based on the ruling.

Looking forward to millions of main-land Chinese customers buying the iPad.

I dont think you guys realize how much $100+ Billion dollars in cash really is. If Apple had even have of this money back in the 1980's, the whole technological landscape of planet earth could very well be much different today.

Food for thought.

Will do good
Jul 2, 2012, 11:02 AM
The Chinese court are a rip, paying these guys $60 million for what?

The same thing may happen to the Chinese court and company one day, payback is a bitch.

gatortpk
Jul 2, 2012, 11:16 AM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

Actually, I smiled and said "YES!"

PracticalMac
Jul 2, 2012, 11:25 AM
farken ProView,

Played loose and fast game, lied and two faced, and got away with $60 mil.

$25 mil would have been OK to pay off lawyers and still get a nice sum, but $60 is really striking gold.

BC2009
Jul 2, 2012, 11:32 AM
I dont think you guys realize how much $100+ Billion dollars in cash really is. If Apple had even have of this money back in the 1980's, the whole technological landscape of planet earth could very well be much different today.

Food for thought.

I realize how much it is and $96M goes a long way in R&D and investment within the company.

I think you may not realize how much $96M really is. Amazon (who is the largest online retailer by an order of magnitude over the next competitor) posted a quarterly profit of $130M in Q1. $96M is almost 75% of that.

It is less than 0.1% of their total $100B in cash, but can you imagine what it would do to the share price if Apple lost that $96M bond by losing the actual lawsuit to Samsung when it goes to court? I don't think the risk is worth it for the Galaxy Nexus, but I think it may be worth it if they can parlay this victory into a quick victory against the Galaxy SIII. Then the increased profitability from preventing IP infringement by Samsung may have some serious benefits.

MacinDoc
Jul 2, 2012, 11:50 AM
My house is worth £120k bricks, mortar and fixtures. The market value is £450k because that is what the market is willing to pay. That value is held up by the desire for people to own their house. The iPad name was worth more to apple than it initially paid and any seller that had the right and knew they were selling to Apple would have known that.

You point out their incompetence at transferring the rights and I think you are correct. However we have all benefited from a screw up at some point. In this case they had an opportunity to revisit the sale knowing the true identity of the buyer. The initial claim was too high, but I believe Apple has paid what the name was worth pre launch. It is a billion dollar trademark now.
So if you found out after you signed a contract to sell your house that the buyer was Elton John, you would be entitled to go back to him and ask for more money than you contracted to sell it for? The market value is determined by the product, not the buyer. This is why most large corporations make purchases like this through dummy corporations, to avoid being gouged and to just pay the fair market value.

In any case, you also can't use the current value of the iPad name to determine what its value was at the time. When IPAD purchased the name for Apple, the name was worth virtually nothing. It had no market and no brand recognition. It was only after Apple introduced the iPad that the name gained value.

jacobj
Jul 2, 2012, 12:00 PM
One of the more bizarre arguments I've ever heard, as you just argued against the the basic rationale for commerce. Not "capitalism", but commerce itself, the actually trading of goods and services between parties that has been going on for tens of thousands of years. Commerce only happens because the buyer values something more than the seller. If the buyer were morally required to reveal to the seller why he valued it more, and the seller were able to jack the price up to capture the additional value for himself, commerce would not happen.

I was blatant because you seemed to be missing it and still are. I made the argument because you stated it had some kind of inherent value that a trademark does not. That is sims wrong.

My point, that you are intent on missing, is that Apple deceived the seller. I am not expecting them to reveal the price they were willing to pay, only that they do not deceive the seller by disguising their identity. You seem to be arguing that deception is fine.

Bankers are rightly having to compensate customers that they knowingly deceived in the UK. the buyers could have attained the knowledge required to avoid the pitfalls of the purchase, but te banks failed to disclose such pitfalls, believing them to be on the right side of legal, even if they were dishonest. Such practices dont make for a strong economy, but instead encourage a culture of deceipt and greed. Capitalism is a tool, not an objective. In this case Apple broke the spirit of a fair and equitable open market.

Radio
Jul 2, 2012, 12:00 PM
Nice troll.
Sensitive?


I have an iPad I can say whatever I want lol

Bezetos
Jul 2, 2012, 12:13 PM
They are idiots. The corrupt Chinese COMMUNIST/SOCIALIST government got them $60M. Proview will just piss it away again. This was protection money Apple had to pay. There will be other opportunities to get donkey raped again by China. When the cost of cloning, unfounded lawsuits, etc gets high enough, Apple will be manufacturing domestically again.

Lol, some democratic governments are more corrupt than the Chinese, it has nothing to do with the country being communist.

yuenadan
Jul 2, 2012, 12:49 PM
Funny how Taiwan is a part of China until it's convenient ( for " China " ) for it not to be !

^^ This.

The People's Republic of China can try all they want to brainwash their people into thinking Taiwan is not a country, and just a 'renegade province', but in reality it's very different. England has more power over Canada than China has of Taiwan.

As a resident of Taiwan for a few years now, China's behaviour really disgusts me. As does the complacency of countries like USA and Canada, who happily turn a blind eye to Taiwan's situation. Last I read China had about 1500 missiles aimed at Taiwan, and every year 100 more more missiles are added. But USA is more interested in China's $$$. Same for my home country of Canada, who are more than happy to turn a blind eye when peddling their dirty oil sands.

maxwelltech
Jul 2, 2012, 01:16 PM
Apple should increase the selling prices of their products in China..
They are already much higher than US prices.

Cubeeless
Jul 2, 2012, 01:45 PM
They are already much higher than US prices.

Anyway, they should be higher..

Tailpike1153
Jul 2, 2012, 01:48 PM
Loss vs gain. Apple loses $60M to gain Billions on iPad sales in China. Plus the fan base has been energized by the rape and pillaging if Apple. Not quite enough to take to the streets but many Apple fans are pissed. While the winner Proview still is $340 million in debt with no more lifelines in sight. Even though this settlement is nearly 4x too much, I'm not feeling sorry for Apple. The Chinese government and court system, I don't have enough tears.

Nonce
Jul 2, 2012, 02:06 PM
Nice try . No need to downvote.

...
There aren't enough engineers in the US (Hello, education, no child left behind)
...

Do yourself a favor and read up on this (Plenty of info available), instead of repeating uninformed patriotic statements.

Nice try.

Right, before "no child left behind" the America schools system was producing engineers at pace that just could not be absorbed by the American university system. And if it had not been for "no child left behind" American students would be taking up all the engineering seats at Chinese and Indian universities.

Do yourself a favor and read up on this (Plenty of info available), instead of repeating uninformed ANTI-patriotic statements.

There really should be a minimum IQ for posters.

----------



If you follow the logistics about producing millions of electronic devices in USA that have been discussed in many ways, you would know that there are not enough workers available in the US to do the type of production tech companies need.

Slave labor has for a long time been the preferred solution, but since it is the 21st century, mechanization, robotics, and other more creative measures would be the preferred approach.

lixuelai
Jul 2, 2012, 02:21 PM
^^ This.

The People's Republic of China can try all they want to brainwash their people into thinking Taiwan is not a country, and just a 'renegade province', but in reality it's very different. England has more power over Canada than China has of Taiwan.

As a resident of Taiwan for a few years now, China's behaviour really disgusts me. As does the complacency of countries like USA and Canada, who happily turn a blind eye to Taiwan's situation. Last I read China had about 1500 missiles aimed at Taiwan, and every year 100 more more missiles are added. But USA is more interested in China's $$$. Same for my home country of Canada, who are more than happy to turn a blind eye when peddling their dirty oil sands.

It is the Taiwanese government's official position that Taiwan is a part of China however it doesn't recognize the PRC government. Taiwan is a province of the Republic of China which still claims all the mainland territory along with Mongolia. It just happens that the RoC only has 1 province left...

Mystic386
Jul 2, 2012, 03:02 PM
I take it you haven't been following the story?

Proview made and sold a device that looked very much like the original iMac. It was called the iPad (Internet Personal Access Device).

Long after Proview stopped selling their iPad an Apple shell company purchased the worldwide rights to the iPad trademark from Proview.

When Proview found out that Apple was the buyer and saw the sales of Apple's iPad skyrocket they said they didn't sell the rights to the iPad in China.

Proview files a lawsuit for $2 billion.

No matter how you slice it, Proview's actions were pretty shady. On the other hand Apple was a bit sloppy in crossing the i's and dotting the t's since this wasn't simply thrown out of court.

In any case it is a good lesson for any business that operates internationally.

I had been following this and your assessment seems to be at odds with the facts.

Proview China allege that the rights sold by Proview Taiwan, a subsidiary, were not theirs to sell.

Yes Hong Kong made a ruling in favor of Apple.

My guess is Apple, weighing the facts decided to settle because it was the best business decision.

There could be two reasons for that;

- they knew that their case was arguable and they could have well been on the receiving end of a much bigger costs award.

- they decided they were legally right but the blocking of sales while Android, Samsung and others gained traction in the Chinese market was not a good idea,

Or a combination of these.

In reality this case was never tested in court and we'll never know what the outcome would have been. To guess otherwise is just that... a guess.

The facts are the deal is done. End of story.

I personally think it is better for Apple to have settled this. Regardless of the outcome and the behind the scenes detail, good on Proview for fighting this and winning.

I don't believe Apple can sue Proview Taiwan because the facts were never tested in court and a decision given. What an interesting case and interesting lesson it'll make in business schools.

Michaelgtrusa
Jul 2, 2012, 03:02 PM
Really Apple lost? ...and china owes us trillions for stealing.

Glideslope
Jul 2, 2012, 03:15 PM
There not, they have $60,000,000.

Yes, but watch the China gates swing open a lot quicker now. It's 2012. Wana play? Then your gonna pay. In China anyway. :apple:

----------

Really Apple lost? ...and china owes us trillions for stealing.

True, but what to do? Can't Nuke em. :apple:

AR999
Jul 2, 2012, 03:26 PM
$120 million is the amount Apple originally paid for the use of the iPad trademark.

Please don't make things up, the amount was $55,000.

Source: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/07/apple-chinese-ipad-trademark/

rtdunham
Jul 2, 2012, 03:28 PM

Edit) For idiots downvoting;

You proved your superior intelligence to me when you prefaced your argument by calling me an idiot. I swung to your point of view right away.
Terry

theelysium
Jul 2, 2012, 04:42 PM
UDNER handed BS. They would have lost the case in America.

wikus
Jul 2, 2012, 05:33 PM
I still think the iPad is a stupid name for the device.

Dont tell me you didn't laugh when jobs pulled out the iPad and it looked like an oversized iPhone.

The reason your comment is being downvoted is because the truth hurts.

Bezetos
Jul 3, 2012, 10:53 AM
Really Apple lost? ...and china owes us trillions for stealing.

Say whaaaaat? China owes United States?

Guess which country has the biggest external debt on the planet.
Now guess who is the largest holder of US external debt.

Yep. It's China.

rendevouspoo
Jul 3, 2012, 10:55 AM
The Chinese court are a rip, paying these guys $60 million for what?

The same thing may happen to the Chinese court and company one day, payback is a bitch.

Do you agree with what Apple is doing to Samsung?

Bilbo63
Jul 4, 2012, 08:35 AM
The real greasy thing here is the same guy owns the parent company AND the subsidiary. He wanted to be a thorn in Apple's side as long as possible figuring that eventually Apple will cave when they finally need to put this nonsense behind them. His strategy worked.

Now another chinese company wants a payout over the term "Snow Leopard". Gee I didn't see that coming. (sarcasm) This is exactly why it's important to stand your ground. There are plenty of greasy individuals out to pick your pocket.

raramaker
Jul 4, 2012, 02:34 PM
There is an element of truth here. However the value of an item is dependent on how much the buyer is willing to pay. In this case Apple were deceitful by hiding their real identify. I understand why they did it: if leaked that they were buying the name the truth re their intentions for a new device would be out. However the consequence of that action was that the actual owner of the name did not have clarity as to the value of their goods.

I have heard it argued that this is tough luck on the seller. However I believe that the recent doings of banks in the UK have shown us that such immorality is not a good thing.

Apple have now paid what the name iPad was probably worth to them before product launch an that seems fair to me.

With regard to them being trolls I am not sure that stacks up. If their intention had been to scam Apple for more money, then why did they sell it for so little to a company that was not Apple as far as they were concerned?

Does a company really have to tell you its intended usage and value to them? If you sold your house for what seemed like a fair price and the company built an expensive hotel on the site of your home, were they dishonest by not telling you?

You sell for a price between the value to you and the perceived value to the buyer. The buyer does not need to tell you his intended use of the property.

You also forget that Proview was not even using the trademark. They were about to lose the name anyways.

motorazr
Jul 5, 2012, 09:42 AM
Missed that. Yeah its butt ugly. But still doesn't negate the fact they had prior registration and right to the trademark.

I think what I, amongst many others (hopefully...), am trying to get at, is not the idea that they had it first. Sure, they did. But Trademarks are supposed to protect a company from having their name (logo, slogan, etc) **STOLEN**, since it is supposed to distinguish their company or product.

However, since the preview iPad name clearly was not the inspiration for Apple's iPad (it's not the Internet Personal Access Device, which is preview's ACTUAL device name....), not to mention that their 'iPad' was already borrowing Apple's iMac design.

Oh well. Doesn't do any good to be upset about it, but its just all these similar suits get annoying, especially with such impeccably large sums of cash just being thrown around.

jacobj
Jul 23, 2012, 01:10 AM
Does a company really have to tell you its intended usage and value to them? If you sold your house for what seemed like a fair price and the company built an expensive hotel on the site of your home, were they dishonest by not telling you?

You sell for a price between the value to you and the perceived value to the buyer. The buyer does not need to tell you his intended use of the property.

You also forget that Proview was not even using the trademark. They were about to lose the name anyways.

If the developer disguised themselves as a happy young couple looking for a home and then built a hotel, then I would have an issue with it. If they came to me as a developer, then I know what their interests are.

That is all I am, or ever have been saying.

ComputersaysNo
Jul 23, 2012, 04:37 AM
Good news for everyone who believes in Karma: Proview is getting sued by their own lawyers who helped them getting 60mil from Apple :D

http://m.engadget.com/2012/07/22/proview-grandall-law-firm-ipad-court-case/?icid=eng_latest_art

Gasu E.
Jul 23, 2012, 03:53 PM
I was blatant because you seemed to be missing it and still are. I made the argument because you stated it had some kind of inherent value that a trademark does not. That is sims wrong.


I never said any such thing. Also, this is a misguided reaction to my single commentary upon your ravings.


My point, that you are intent on missing, is that Apple deceived the seller. I am not expecting them to reveal the price they were willing to pay, only that they do not deceive the seller by disguising their identity. You seem to be arguing that deception is fine.


I am arguing no such thing. Please read my comment again... and the actual thing you said that I was reacting to.