Apple and Proview Face Off in Shanghai Court Over iPad Trademark

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Feb 22, 2012.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    While Proview has had some success in its battle against Apple's use of the "iPad" trademark in China with minor court decisions against local retailers, the two companies are now going directly head-to-head in a higher-profile case underway in Shanghai. There has been no decision in the case yet, but lawyers for both sides spent four hours today laying out their evidence for the presiding judge. Reuters notes that Apple has gone on the offensive by citing the impact on the Chinese economy if iPad sales were to be halted, given the iPad's massive popularity and Proview's current lack of any product offering under that name.
    Apple's tactics of highlighting the economic impact of the iPad and calling into question the validity of Proview's trademark given a lack of physical product using the name are side arguments to its primary claims, which hold that Proview agreed to transfer the rights to an Apple-held company in late 2009 and has failed to uphold its part of the deal.

    [​IMG]


    Proview's iPAD, sold from 1998 until 2009 (Source: The Wall Street Journal)
    A Hong Kong court sided with Apple last year, ruling that Proview and its subsidiaries had colluded to extort significant sums of money from Apple in refusing to hand over the Chinese rights to the trademark. But Apple needs to convince courts in mainland China to adopt the same view as it seeks to thwart Proview's attempts at halting iPad sales and its requests for as much as $2 billion in compensation. Proview has argued that the Hong Kong ruling is inadmissible in Chinese courts, although Apple could presumably submit the same primary evidence to the Chinese court that it did in the Hong Kong case, seeking to convince the Chinese judge to independently come to the same conclusion.

    Article Link: Apple and Proview Face Off in Shanghai Court Over iPad Trademark
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    #2
    Well, it's true what they say. "Nobody can resist the charming of iPAD."
     
  3. macrumors member

    chuloo

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
  4. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #4
    Love the copy on this ad. Typical of what I see in Taiwan all the time. lmao
     
  5. macrumors 603

    troop231

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
  6. macrumors regular

    BobbyRond

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Location:
    The Hague, The Netherlands
    #6
    All these reports about Chinese factory workers making long shifts. I feel for the Apple lawyers... Those poor guys are making 90 hours a week! :D
     
  7. GekkePrutser, Feb 22, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2012

    macrumors 6502a

    GekkePrutser

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2005
    Location:
    Ireland
    #7
    What I find funny about this is that this iPAD itself looks a lot like an iMac ripoff. Which was also introduced in 1998.

    Edit: It would be interesting to see if it was actually released after the iMac was. Not that it would help Apple though, even if it was a copycat iMac, as the trademark was granted anyway.
     
  8. macrumors member

    aednichols

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    #8
    This feels remarkably like the original iMac in terms of design (all-in-one, rounded enclosure with a CRT and a handle on top) and purpose (machine that makes it easy to get on the Internet).
     
  9. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #9
    Fair is Fair

    Apple would be quick to go after anyone using their trademarks so it is only fair that Apple are stopped from trampling over an exiting product with the ipad name.
     
  10. macrumors regular

    Metal Dice

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Location:
    Denmark
    #10
    This is the truth, and frankly it's the problem with IP laws. A lack of common sense.
     
  11. Menopause, Feb 22, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2012

    macrumors 6502

    Menopause

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    #11
    Free money!

    Here's hoping the Chinese judge has common sense to see this is simply blackmail and extortion, since Apple had already acquired the rights to the name before launching its product — I'm pretty sure the world's largest tech company won't do something as foolish as doing anything else than this.

    All that's left of it is for Proview's CEO to mug Tim Cook at gunpoint.
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    kemo

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Location:
    /Users/kemo
  13. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Location:
    Earth
    #13
    I say stick it to Proview, so the next fool will think twice before bringing up a groundless suite.
     
  14. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #14
    I agree. I don't know why Apple thinks that Proview DOESN'T have the trademark right. Just because Apple is a corporate monster doesn't mean that they don't have to adhere to the same trademark laws as everyone else. Proview's compensation request is outrageous of course, but I would think their rights to that name in China is undisputed.

    Tony
     
  15. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    #15
    How do you know this? Have you seen a copy of the original agreement when apple purchased the rest of the worldwide rights?
     
  16. macrumors 68000

    spazzcat

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    #16
    Unless they really did sell the rights to Apple, and ProView is just pissed bacause they didn't know it was Apple buying the rights and are just trying to get more money now...
     
  17. Hustler1337, Feb 22, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2012

    macrumors 65816

    Hustler1337

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2010
    Location:
    London, UK
    #17
    ... but those 'Apple lawyers' are probably earning more in the 90 hours than a Chinese factory worker will in their lifetime working there. ;)


    Edit:
    I just Googled and found this article by MIC Gadget comparing the two.
     
  18. macrumors 68000

    spazzcat

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    #18
    Maybe beause Apple bought the world rights to the term iPad from them?
     
  19. macrumors newbie

    iRockSteady

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    Location:
    R!chmond VA
    #19
    If Proview truly has no customers, no market etc. then they should have no right to 'iPad' -- how can something that basically doesn't exist have rights to it's... nonexistence? :cool:
     
  20. macrumors 6502

    5aga

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Gig City
    #20
    this is the likely scenario. Apple may win this case however Im troubled by their defense which is basically that China makes too much money off their manufacturing their product.

    TBH its borderline extortion.
     
  21. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #21
    I don't think highlighting the economic impact of the iPad is a valid argument for trademark.
     
  22. ihateilove, Feb 22, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 24, 2012

    macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    #22
    Apple's problems aren't unique, in China

    Hee Hee, did Proview make this?

    On a more serious note, this report does a good job observing that the Proview problem is just the latest in a series of chapters which show the problems Apple -- and any Western firm -- has doing business in China.
     
  23. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    #23
    I think the lack of product, suppliers, etc is a weak argument. How many thousands of patents does Apple hold for things that aren't necessarily physical products? Yes, some are for things they're working on, but many (most) will never come to fruition but you darn well know Apple would sue if someone were to use "trample" on their IP.
     
  24. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #24
    Um..I must have skipped over that part. D'OH! :D

    Tony
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    #25
    yeah, if they actually had to change the name it would still sell
     

Share This Page