Or annoying little brother
Honestly Proview, this is just getting embarrassing.
The expression: "Grasping at Straws" comes to mind (as does "frivolous litigation".)
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.
Proview Sues Apple in U.S. Over Alleged Deception in iPad Trademark Purchase
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Or annoying little brother
Honestly Proview, this is just getting embarrassing.
The expression: "Grasping at Straws" comes to mind (as does "frivolous litigation".)
The difference between MACKeeper and MacKeeper...
I don't trust any product with "MAC" in it (unless it's referring to MAC addresses). IPAD and iPad are pretty different, IPAD just stands for something.
That would be a boost to the U.S. economy, but wouldn't that just drive product prices far higher than they already are?
And the shameless hypocrisy continues. Please Apple just pay what you should pay in good faith already. You try to sue Samsung and others at every turn, but you blatantly use someone else's trademark and for whatever reason, you feel you shouldn't have to pay. But everyone else owes you everything right? I've got a nice tall glass of ethics and morals on the table for you. Come take nice big soul cleansing swig.
Absolutely despicable and shameless.
Absolutely despicable and shameless.
A few courts sided with Proview on issuing injunctions in minor towns but the most recent one sided with Apple about an injunction country-wide.
Injunctions are not proof that Proview has the trademarks, it's just the first step before going to the full trial that'll determine the true ownerships of those trademarks.
It'll be a few months before the main court decides the answer and right now Proview is doing everything it can to force a settlement.
It has already been estimated that if iPads were made in the U.S. the price increase wouldn't be substantial. I believe the article that I had read said that the price increase would only be about $60 per iPad.
What the hell are you talking about? Apple is under no obligation to pay more than it agreed to pay.
Proview (China) signed the deal. Apple has proof and that is why they won in HK. Thanks MikhailT for the link.
Sneaky, sneaky Apple!!
Frankly, it was deceptive- Whether it was fair game or not, or more importantly in this case- legal or not- is another question entirely. But I would be upset if I thought I was dealing with a small company and it turned out to be a famous and huge international corporation, that's for sure.
Frankly, it was deceptive- Whether it was fair game or not, or more importantly in this case- legal or not- is another question entirely. But I would be upset if I thought I was dealing with a small company and it turned out to be a famous and huge international corporation, that's for sure.
When your dealing with a communist country that has a horrible human rights track record, you can bet money goes a long way. Unfortunately for Proview, the guy with the deeper pockets usually wins. Apple obviously has the deeper pockets for the back room deals. It's not that hard to see this. Proview is not China, but the back rooms of the halls of "justice" is run by China. Greed Greed Greed.
How is it deceptive and illegal? This happens all the time and has never been outlawed in US. Companies are allowed to set up shell companies to buy products.
The reason they do this is because many companies would jack up prices if they knew what company was going to buy the stuff. Also, how can companies protect themselves from getting out in the public if it was told in the news that a big company has bought something?
You are missing some pretty fundamental differences.So this common practice is deception... and yet despite what the Hong Kong court decided in Apples favor, its NOT deception for Proview (the parent company) to sell the trademark and state that it included China, then have their own subsidiary (also called Proview) magically disagree, two years later, with the deal the parent company made. I see
What Apple did was completely legal and very common. While Proview may have been "deceived" in the sense that they didn't know who owned IP Application Development, Ltd., they were in no sense ripped off.
It's kind of like when you go to buy a car and the salesman asks what you do and you say you are a teacher rather than a doctor or lawyer or other high-paying profession.
On the other hand, what Proview did (or seems to have done) amounts to actual fraud. Like a salesman taking $50,000 for a Mercedes and then delivering a SmartCar which is "made by" Mercedes.
It does have some design cues from the iMac. But I think that there were several "i" or "I" prefixed names in the late 90's, most of which seemed to have some connection with the internet in some way or another. It is a kind of strange name, though, as what Proview made is in no sense a "pad".
Please re-read my comment. I am not claiming it is illegal. However, if you can't see how this is deceptive, then you need to go back and take an ethics class. Now, if that deception is warranted, is again, another issue entirely.
A few months I don't think I can take much more of this proview news.
----------
When I first saw this case I thought valve was suing apple for some stupid reason. But I wasn't really that wrong cause proview is suing apple for some pretty dumb reasons too.
I think that this is the least intelligent statement I have heard on this thread. Apple and Samsung legal squabbles aside, Apple did buy the trademark for iPad from Proview's parent company and from Fujitsu. They may have paid an abhorrently small amount of money in relation to return on investment, but they paid nonetheless. The problem is that China does not abide by WTO IPR regulations which it agreed to abide by(for you, I will spell it out, IPR stands for Intellectual Property Rights) and Proview is trying to capitalize on this. This case started in 2009 when Proview(China) asked Apple for 10 million USD, and has since made several cases in China about it which have received a lot of publicity. Needless to say it has not dampened Apple's popularity in China, nor its position. If Proview had a similiar product or any products on the market today I would believe it may have a legitimate case in China(note earlier, China does not abide by WTO IPR regulations). The ethics on the table are the lack of morals shown by companies in China, where I run a creative events company that has to go to court three times a year at minimum to defend patents that we have filed both internationally and in China. Copying/Counterfeiting products are one thing, but trying to saying Apple is at fault is another. In an argument about business ethics, morals, and standards, China will never win and neither will you. Do your research, and keep from posting, nobody wants to hear an aimless statement. Apple should only pay if they want Proview to go away immediately, but in a battle of who can afford to pay lawyers more and uninterruptedly Apple will win. While it is possible that a competitor is financially supporting Proview, if that competitor was Samsung, they would be foolish to continue, because Apple can take their approximately 8-10 billion USD/year they pay Samsung and move it elsewhere, and judging that that is approximately 30-40% of Samsung's yearly revenue, it would not be in there interest to support Proview, especially since it is not having an effect on Chinese consumers appetite for Apple products, especially the iPad and iPhone.
I don't recall Proview making a consumer tablet so there was no fraud in claiming a lack of competition.
And it's not illegal to use dummy corps to keep plans secret and to keep folks from inflating values simply because of who you are
----------
That's right. Trademarks are market and region specific. Fujitsu has some of the countries and Proview some. So IPAD (on behalf of Apple) make deals with both companies so they could have the rights to all countries.
----------
Trouble with that statement is that there is no proof that Apple is making a tv or if they are that they ever intended to call it the iTV, just like how no one could prove they ever intended to use that name for their set top box Apple TV
And it's not illegal to use dummy corps to keep plans secret and to keep folks from inflating values simply because of who you are
----------
That's right. Trademarks are market and region specific. Fujitsu has some of the countries and Proview some. So IPAD (on behalf of Apple) make deals with both companies so they could have the rights to all countries.
----------
Trouble with that statement is that there is no proof that Apple is making a tv or if they are that they ever intended to call it the iTV, just like how no one could prove they ever intended to use that name for their set top box Apple TV
Ok, how is this deceptive? Please explain that part to us since you've taken the course.
Laugh now, but every one of you just wait. Proview is going to win this case in China and now in the USA. Apple is going to have to change the name of their iPad, and Proview is FINALLY going to give their original IPAD that looks alarmingly like an iMac but never mind that part the 1000fold comeback that it deserves.
The re-emergence of Proview's IPAD will act as a complete game changer on what present society's definition of what a "game changer" actually is, and the only reason anyone will carry around their Apple iTabs (formerly the Apple iPad) is because they'll want something flat and sturdy to rest their Proview IPADs on (new models will feature a carrying-handle and convenient retractable electrical plug).
The re-emergence of Proview's IPAD will act as a complete game changer on what present society's definition of what a "game changer" actually is, and the only reason anyone will carry around their Apple iTabs (formerly the Apple iPad) is because they'll want something flat and sturdy to rest their Proview IPADs on (new models will feature a carrying-handle and convenient retractable electrical plug).