If this has been posted, forgive me.


iPad trademark row in China threatens Apple
By He Chunmei
BEIJING ( Caixin Online ) — Proview Technology (Shenzhen) Co. was once the world’s fourth-largest manufacturer of flat panel displays. Today, it’s heavily in debt and claims only one valuable asset — the rights to commercial use of the product name iPad in China.

These rights are at the heart of a heated dispute between Shenzhen Proview and Apple Inc. AAPL -0.12% that dates to June 2010, when the U.S. electronics giant sued the Chinese company claiming exclusive ownership of the iPad trademark.

In February, the dispute flared with an intensity rarely seen on the world’s trademark battlegrounds. Shenzhen Proview fought back by seeking and winning support from regional branches of the Chinese government’s State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC), which in turn had Apple iPad computer tablets pulled from store shelves in several cities.

ABOUT CAIXIN
Caixin is a Beijing-based media group dedicated to providing high-quality and authoritative financial and business news and information through periodicals, online and TV/video programs.
• Get the Caixin e-newsletter
An ultimate victory for Apple could strengthen the iPad’s marketing presence in China. But if Proview wins, the American company could be forced to pay $400 million in damages as well as government fines. In a worst-case scenario, authorities could ban iPad sales in China as well as exports of the Chinese-made devices.

Apple based its 2010 name claim on a 2009 agreement with Proview Taiwan Ltd. which, like the Shenzhen company, is a unit of Hong Kong-based Proview International HK:334 0.00% .

The lawsuit was thrown out in December by the Shenzhen Municipal Intermediate People’s Court. The court ruled Shenzhen Proview was not a party to the deal signed by Proview Taiwan and an Apple intermediary in Britain called IP Application Development Ltd.

Apple appealed the decision to the Guangdong Provincial High Court, which heard arguments from both sides Feb. 29 and adjourned without a verdict. The court did not say when or if a decision might be rendered, although an out-of-court settlement may be reached.

In the run-up to the high court hearing, Shenzhen Proview executives had pushed hard for SAIC involvement and apparently catching Apple by surprise.

Shenzhen Proview attorney Ma Dongxiao announced through his microblog Feb. 13 that SAIC branches across the country had been asked to investigate alleged trademark infringements in their jurisdictions by Apple. These agencies, which operate under the central government and State Council, have the power to block any product’s sale in their area.


Apple
As of Feb. 14, nearly 20 of these departments in nine provinces and municipalities had agreed to Shenzhen Proview’s request. Media reports say probes had gotten under way in Shanghai, Guangdong, Hebei and Jiangsu. Caixin learned Beijing’s Chaoyang and Xicheng districts were also investigating.

In addition, Ma said his client had filed lawsuits in Shanghai and Guangdong courts against Apple and some of its franchisers in China claiming the U.S. company had violated Shenzhen Proview’s trademark rights and demanding a nationwide ban on sales of Apple iPads.

Moreover, Ma said, Shenzhen Proview was preparing to ask the General Administration of Customs to ban all imports and exports of Apple iPads, which are manufactured in China.

Meanwhile, Apple, which had long been publicly silent about the trademark battle, asked online retailers including Amazon Joyo, Suning and Tesco to stop selling iPads.

The American company issued an unusual statement Feb. 14 aimed at defending its position. It said that “years ago” Apple had bought “Proview’s iPad trademark in 10 different countries around the world. Proview refuses to recognize and carry out the part of the agreement involving China.”

Bigger worries

Legal professionals interviewed by Caixin said the two sides are likely to reach a settlement. Nevertheless, Apple executives are worried about something more than monetary damages: They face the wrath of powerful SAIC officials around the country.

“Apple isn’t really concerned about Proview,” said Yang Chunquan, a senior partner and intellectual property rights specialist at Shanghai Panocean Law Firm. “But it is concerned about various local industry and commerce authorities, because you don’t know how big of a fine they will issue.”

Quote
samintx
iPad trademark row in China threatens Apple
By He Chunmei
BEIJING ( Caixin Online ) — Proview Technology (Shenzhen) Co. was once the world’s fourth-largest manufacturer of flat panel displays. Today, it’s heavily in debt and claims only one valuable asset — the rights to commercial use of the product name iPad in China.

These rights are at the heart of a heated dispute between Shenzhen Proview and Apple Inc. AAPL -0.12% that dates to June 2010, when the U.S. electronics giant sued the Chinese company claiming exclusive ownership of the iPad trademark.

at work (Starbucks) we have a flat panel monitor that has the iPad name. i'll take a picture tomorrow. i noticed it's name last year and found it amusing. this must be the same company. definitely predates the arrival of Apple's iPad.

---

"Success isn't about how much money you make. It is about the difference you make in people's lives."--Michelle Obama

[forums.macresource.com]

[forums.macresource.com]

In China, Proview says Apple doesn't own the iPad name.

In the US, Proview says Apple bought the name fraudulently.

---

You and I have memories longer than the road that stretches out ahead.

We don’t do focus groups. They just ensure that you don’t offend anyone, and produce bland inoffensive products. —Sir Jonathan Ive

-An armed society is a polite society.
And hope is a lousy defense.

There is no safety for honest men
except by believing all possible evil
of evil men.

Pixels were born to be punished. -Frederick Van Johnson

Mister, that's a ten-gallon hat on a twenty-gallon head.

I *love* Sigs. It's Glocks I hate.

And you thought that you had problems?

---

gl @ Dana Point, CA

Quote
RAMd®d
In the US, Proview says Apple bought the name fraudulently.

lol! In other words, "We didn't know it was going to be so successful! Now we want more money!"

Quote
Lux Interior

Quote
RAMd®d
In China, Proview says Apple doesn't own the iPad name.

In the US, Proview says Apple bought the name fraudulently.

lol! In other words, "We didn't know it was going to be so successful! Now we want more money!"

The allegation is Apple used a shell company to acquire the iPad trademark in some markets, but never acquired the right to the iPad name for the Chinese market. Two different cases. The statements RAMd®d posted are not mutually exclusive.

Trademarks seems to be a by jurisdiction process. Different markets may have different rights holders or the same rights holder may wish to negotiate different deals for different markets. You dig? Ever notice Apple didn't have the right to use Airport in Japan, but were clearly not prevented from marketing products as Airport in other markets? If Apple keeps naming products after already existing trademarks (OS 9, Airport, Mighty Mouse, iPhone, iOS, iPad, and I bet there are many more I can't recall at the moment), there are bound to be occasional snags.

This is not an argument for one side or the other, but it is worth understanding something about the issue before mocking the participants. I remember people mocking the Mighty Mouse trademark holder…I was probably one of them.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2012 03:46AM by silvarios.

At this point in tme, i-(every word in the unabridged dictionary) has likely been trademarked or registered.

May be time for Apple to do an end run and change the naming strategy to something else. Instead of iTV go with or TViOS or whatever. Then run that for a few years of their next generation products

---

You can tell a lot about a woman by her hands...
- For example, if they are wrapped around your throat she's probably slightly upset.

There is no doubt apple thought they purchased the right to the iPad name in china.

There is also no doubt proview did not know they were selling to apple.

The issue here is simple - if proview had not sold apple the name, Apple could have gone with a different monicker.

The only reason the iPad name is valuable is because it belongs to apple.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2012 08:09AM by sekker.

Quote
Ombligo
May be time for Apple to do an end run and change the naming strategy to something else. Instead of iTV go with or TViOS or whatever. Then run that for a few years of their next generation products

This was my thought as well. As sekker pointed out, the reason that the iPad name is valuable is because it is "attached" to an Apple product.

It seems that Apple's solution needs to come from creating a new product naming protocol...

... But as I always say, "that's my opinion, I could be wrong."

---

gl @ Dana Point, CA

Quote
sekker
There is no doubt apple thought they purchased the right to the iPad name in china.

There is also no doubt proview did not know they were selling to apple.

The issue here is simple - if proview had not sold apple the name, Apple could have gone with a different monicker.

The only reason the iPad name is valuable is because it belongs to apple.

I would agree with the first statement. The second is not so clear. Proview is claiming that they did not know a subsidiary was selling rights to the name to Apple. To only bring it up over a couple years after the iPad was out and the name is now valuable, points to the final statement. It is possible the subsidiary made claims to ownership of IP that it should not have in the sale, but that begs the question of why did not the parent company know.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2012 11:12AM by JoeH.

Quote
JoeH
To only bring it up over a couple years after the iPad was out and the name is now valuable, points to the final statement.

You know what's weird, this isn't true. Proview didn't wait two years.

"But the bit that interests is that the claim that the China rights were never sold to Apple is not some recent invention. Proview has been saying this for two years now, almost from the moment that the rights to the name in other territories were sold to Apple."

Apple has a history of pressing forward with products before the rights are established. Perhaps this time Apple did work things out, perhaps they didn't, or perhaps they didn't but a court will still rule there was no infringement*.

Last time around people doubted the legality of the case, which was wrong as well and a quick dip into Chinese IP law would have cleared up immediately. Who knows if Proview will win their case? Regardless, the inaccuracies being bandied about are worth correcting. The Mighty Mouse case was similar. Incorrect assumptions were made by Apple, CBS, and the average Apple enthusiast posting in forums (the last easily describes myself, I am not necessarily poking at others), but at the end of the day Apple lost the case.

*As in the OS-9 versus Mac OS 9 case where there was a clear Trademark violation in the operating system market no less, but the courts ruled the likelihood for confusion was low enough not to warrant a ruling against Apple).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2012 12:59PM by silvarios.