Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Accused of 'iPad' Trademark Infringement in China
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
U.S. law for trademarks states that you need to be actively using the trademark -- you cannot squat on a name. Owning a trademark for 10 years in the U.S.A. that you did not use and then trying to sue for infringement would get you nowhere.
I don't know how long its been since these folks have used their trademark, nor do I know what Chinese law says, but generally Chinese patent law is more strict in terms of what you can patent -- I would imagine the same would hold for trademarks (I am betting Apple's lawyers looked into this and it was probably the basis for preventing this company from selling the trademark).
Chinese courts are also aware that Apple indirectly provides employment to a large group of people through manufacturing contracts with some major Chinese manufacturing corporations. I doubt they are going to give any special preference to a name-squater trying to sue Apple.
Bet it goes away
I am betting that Terry Gou of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn makes a call from his iPhone and this somehow goes away.
I am betting that Terry Gou of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn makes a call from his iPhone and this somehow goes away.
That fine now sue us for it. Not enough to have a trademark you have to be able to sue us and not go bankrupt.
[RANT]I think I will trademark iCrap. Maybe some day it will make me rich
I can easily establish prior use.
Wow, so all chinese people are the same? Its just one big entity over there? The company might not even be involved in counterfeit products.
I believe the comment was to point out the juxtaposition that in a country where counterfeiting is rampant, that the legal system fails to control, and that costs companies millions if not billions in lost revenue and image damage, said legal system is upholding a companies right to a copyright.
You never hear of any Chinese companies asking the government to step in and halt the counterfeiting industry because it damages China's reputation, but instead are complicit possibly because this allows for a further revenue avenue.
I have spoken to several product managers who will either not allow certain products to be manufactured in China because they know (from previous experience) that during manufacturing "down time" the factories often use the machines and similar (often cheap, sub-standard) materials to produce knock-offs that look virtually identical but are of poorer quality, or take this into account and only produce generic goods there which often are not worth counterfeiting.
I have it on good authority that this is a major reason why there are very few companies that have carbon bicycle frames manufactured in China.
Now while I agree with you that the US and China have similar systems of capitalism. I think you are being a little egocentric in your statement "Every country is like a cup of fine coffee. The blend might be a bit different, but in the end, it's still coffee."
So are you saying that every single Chinese person has sued Apple? I don't get you. How are are the "Their?" From what I read, it was a company suing Apple, not bootleggers.
The idea that this is even infringing upon their technology is HIGHLY debatable...
But the company cant just demand $800 million because Apple is making cash...
They need to prove that they actually SUFFERED $800 million in damage from this. I doubt theyve even made $10 million (IF that) on the IP.
But the company cant just demand $800 million because Apple is making cash...
They need to prove that they actually SUFFERED $800 million in damage from this. I doubt theyve even made $10 million (IF that) on the IP.
It's not Japanese. The text is too small to read, but there's no kana so it's not Japanese.
There's a lot of very silly and poorly informed arguments on this thread.
Exactly. So it's pretty standard practice to sue for a huge amount in hopes of getting a much smaller amount. Anyway, the idea of anyone in America complaining about other countries allowing silly lawsuits is pretty funny. We are the land of the 2.86 million dollar spilled coffee.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants
An interesting case - the plaintiff original offered to settle for medical costs $20 grand (she suffered some pretty severe burns to a tender area), NcD's refused. She got a lawyer, again offered to settle, and sued when McD's refused. After a trial, which yielded some interesting information about McD's and coffee, she won - although she was held partially at fault. The multi-million dollar settlement was reduced to around $640k, and they eventually reached a settlement.
While it makes a great headline - the reality of the case is that it wasn't simple "spill some hot coffee and get rich suing."
That Wiki article was written for the masses out there who misrepresent the facts surrounding the case or quote details from it out of context. Perhaps you should actually bother to read it.
Why do people feel the need to be pointlessly antagonistic?
The case was controversial because a jury found for 2.86 million dollars. Yes, judge had to intervene, although even that intervention only dialed the amount awarded down to an entirely silly $640,000.
The point is that we Americans can hardly laugh at a Chinese company suing people for silly amounts of money, even if the case is trivial.
I am glad I am not the only one who found that strange. I also found it a bit creepy.
Nothing in that Wiki article makes the case any less ridiculous or the person you responded to at all incorrect...
The facts surrounding the case make it less ridiculous than implying someone got rich by spilling coffee on themselves.
The person I responded to stated she received 2.86 million, which was incorrect.
In all honesty I agree with your fundamental point that American corporations sue all the time for silly amounts of money.
But I think comparing a case whereby a woman who only wants enough money to cover her medial bills with a corporation who is suing for nearly a billion dollars didn't really make your point.
I did not say that. I wrote "We are the land of the 2.86 million dollar spilled coffee." The original award was for that much, which means I'm technically correct. I admit I was going for shock headlines rather than strict accuracy though, so I accept a hand-slapping.
In all honesty I agree with your fundamental point that American corporations sue all the time for silly amounts of money.
But I think comparing a case whereby a woman who only wants enough money to cover her medical bills with a corporation who is suing for nearly a billion dollars didn't really make your point.
Oh, certainly the comparison only goes so far.
But it's worth noticing that the woman was originally talking to McD's about compensation for ten or twenty thousand dollars, which is perhaps reasonable. That would probably only have covered the medical bills.
It was only after those negotiations broke down, and the case went into the legal system, that the incredibly silly award was handed down. Which is weirdly backwards. You would think the legal system would serve to impose restraint on an individual who wants to sue. Ours (us Americans that is) encourages people to make irrational demands.
Actually, they are socialist. With (massive) capitalist benefits (for the few at the cost of the many). So technically a Paper-Socialist state?
It is irrelevant whether or not China produces Counterfeits. If a company made "fake" iPads, it is Apple's duty to proceed with legal actions.
Conversely, Apple has infringed on a patent. It is now the Jury's and respective lawyers to work out.
I mean come on, USA- people sue MacDonald's for making them fat or by spilling coffee on themselves. Compare this to a patent infringement.
Oh and for those poorly educated people generalising all of China's population as stealers and counterfeiters; please, please go back to college and open up your mind a tad more.
No I am not Chinese. -_-"
Conversely, Apple has infringed on a patent. It is now the Jury's and respective lawyers to work out.
I mean come on, USA- people sue MacDonald's for making them fat or by spilling coffee on themselves. Compare this to a patent infringement.
Oh and for those poorly educated people generalising all of China's population as stealers and counterfeiters; please, please go back to college and open up your mind a tad more.
No I am not Chinese. -_-"