|
Proview sues Apple in the U.S.
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 25 February, 2012
The Chinese electronics maker Proview has sued Apple over the trademark to the iPad, after a successful suit in China.
Proview is accusing Apple of fraud in their purchase tactics for the trademark. Apple purchased the trademark from Proview's subsidiary IP Application Development. The company says the "representatives Apple negotiated with claimed that they wanted the "IPAD" trademark ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
Steel-Ice
Junior Member
|
25. February 2012 @ 17:49 |
Link to this message
|
Apple is get a taste of its on medicine.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. February 2012 @ 17:49
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Member
|
25. February 2012 @ 22:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
It was just a matter of time before they screwed over the wrong people, and the people realized it in time to do something about it.
Connection reset by phear...
|
|
xtago
Senior Member
|
26. February 2012 @ 08:14 |
Link to this message
|
Apple won't win in China with an Chinese company doing the suing.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. February 2012 @ 15:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hhm... try to screw as many companies internationally as you can, as fast as you can, as hard as you can and let $100 billion sit with the caveat that no one can touch it till this little legal gem shows up. Sounds like this has been building up for quite some time. Not to mention peculiar how it's not until 'now' that the media has finally caught wind of it's existence.
Screw unto others... It'll end up being the consumer paying for that coveted name anyway.
|
Junior Member
1 product review
|
27. February 2012 @ 13:35 |
Link to this message
|
No one is listening to the facts.
Apple owns IP Application Development. The tactic used in the purchase is fair, given the circumstances Apple would face, if they headlong went after the name as Apple. If Apple came to you and said, they wanted to buy a name from you, how much would you charge? What if an unknown upstart came to you and ask the same question, how much would you charge?
The difference in value is tantamount to unfair bias and prejudice against a large corporation. Walmart does the same thing when purchasing property to open a brick and mortar store. They buy the land under an assumed name in order to prevent price jacking.
The company in China, had the IPAD name for a product they sold in the 90's. They weren't currently using it and were happy to sell it to another company that could use the name. The sales documentation came from China, and the headquarters of the complaining company, and not Taiwan, as reported. The documentation is viewable on the web. Hong Kong courts, where the transaction originally took place, had sided with Apple. As you may or may not know, Hong Kong has as a part of it's heritage, Western exposure and business sense.
The lower courts of Mainland China, will default for a local entity. That is to be expected and can not be the consideration of any wrong doing on Apple's part. If you understand the perspective and situation of Proview, they are falling on hard times and reaching for any way to increase revenue.
Frankly there is nothing dishonest here, shell corporations for acquisitions are used quite often in the business community. The reasons are to keep trade fair.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. February 2012 @ 13:49
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
27. February 2012 @ 13:55 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by dcmorrow:
No one is listening to the facts.
Which I'll admit your stance is poignant & strongly stated, but based on what? Even in the infancy of Apple's humble beginnings, all was based on the ability to strong arm, sell & weasel those less wittingly to look past the 5 year plan into releasing their immediate use property unto the control of all those Apple (join us).
Simple deduction through history & public released court documentation prove this to be true. Lest i drudge up the leopard & his spots euphemism, why should we believe this company has changed its ways?
Plus, we're talking about a trademark violation, not a patent. And we all just KNOW Apple wouldn't rob anyone of any apps, programming or artwork involved the making there of, of (i.e., trademarked/copywritten work) those said works for their own gain without compensation to those hardworking individuals.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey_P
Senior Member
|
27. February 2012 @ 14:21 |
Link to this message
|
"And we all just KNOW Apple wouldn't rob anyone of any apps, programming or artwork involved the making there of, of (i.e., trademarked/copywritten work) those said works for their own gain without compensation to those hardworking individuals."
Never!
Jeff
Cars, Guitars & Radiation.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. February 2012 @ 14:23
|
