Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
China The Courts Apple

Apple To Pay $60 Million Over iPad Trademark Dispute 120

Posted by samzenpus
from the money-fixes-everything dept.
tekgoblin writes "Today a Chinese court has stated Apple, Inc. has agreed to pay a Chinese company $60 Million dollars to settle their infamous iPad name dispute. In 2006 Apple purchased the Taiwanese rights to the name 'iPad' from the company Proview Electronics. In China however, the trademarked name was still owned by Proview Technologies, a Shenzhen based subsidiary of Proview Electronics. Since 2011, Proview Technologies has battled Apple in the Xicheng district court and in 2012 the Santa Clara Superior Court. Both cases are still ongoing."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple To Pay $60 Million Over iPad Trademark Dispute

Comments Filter:
  • by Kenja (541830) on Monday July 02, 2012 @11:11AM (#40517353)
    China protects its companies (many of which are at least partially state owned). The US does not. One of the reasons so much manufacturing is done in China is because that's the only way to sell there. China puts high import taxes on goods made elsewhere, while the US does not. So if a company wants to sell their product in China they can only do so in a cost effective way by making said product there. If the US matches Chinas tarifs things would be very different.
  • by sribe (304414) on Monday July 02, 2012 @11:15AM (#40517397)

    In 2006 Apple purchased the Taiwanese rights to the name 'iPad' from the company Proview Electronics. In China however, the trademarked name was still owned by Proview Technologies, a Shenzhen based subsidiary of Proview Electronics.

    According to Proview's creditors. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary.

  • by Viol8 (599362) on Monday July 02, 2012 @11:28AM (#40517511)

    If they licensed the name from the parent corp then how can a subsidiary company make a claim on it? Surely a license from the parent by implication means a license from all the parts of the corporation? Or is chinese law just wierd?

  • by k(wi)r(kipedia) (2648849) on Monday July 02, 2012 @11:40AM (#40517615)

    China protects its companies (many of which are at least partially state owned). The US does not. One of the reasons so much manufacturing is done in China is because that's the only way to sell there.

    This I think reflects more the failure of laissez faire capitalism. Capitalism without controls or government intervention only works if everybody plays fair. And it's not just tariffs. China's labor laws are less strictly enforced than in most First World countries. Of course these two reasons by themselves cannot account for China's popularity over, say, India as a manufacturing hub. I suspect China's advantage is that it's easier for a corporation to do business with what is effectively another large corporation.

  • by sribe (304414) on Monday July 02, 2012 @12:17PM (#40517887)

    No there isn't - there are only Apple's claims on one side, versus Proview's claims and this settlement on the other. Apple have never disclosed the text of the contract between their front "IP Application Devlopment" and Proview Electronics. The U.S. case was dismissed because the U.S. court decided it had no jurisdiction to rule on the contract. From all we know right now, Apple may have signed a contract that didn't include China rights, or that failed to specify exactly where the parent company did own the rights, and whether or not that included China. International multi-jurisdictional law is complicated, perhaps Apple's lawyers made a mistake. Or maybe they didn't. But either way, unless you know of someone who has actually seen the contract, then there is no real evidence here. Infer what you will from the fact that Apple settled.

    You're wrong about that. Both the entire contract, and a good number of emails from the negotiations leading up to the contract, came out during the case. The emails are particularly damning, in that the people who said the contract must be signed in Taiwan because that's where the rights were actually held, were the same people who later said "aha! you did not sign in mainland China!"

The more cordial the buyer's secretary, the greater the odds that the competition already has the order.

Working...