Lower Chinese court rules to halt iPad sales

24

Comments

  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post


    Nah mate... http://www.hklii.hk/cgi-bin/sinodisp...2011/1375.html



    1a. There is only ONE person involved.

    There is the counter-claim here and in the media that Proview Shenzhen is somehow removed from Proview Taiwan. This is highly incorrect. See the Hong Kong decision:



    "Yang Long San, Rowell (?Yang?), a Taiwanese, is the founder of the Proview Group. He was at all material times the chairman and chief executive officer of Proview Holdings until he was adjudicated bankrupt on 2 August 2010. Other companies of the Proview Group that feature in these proceedings are Proview Electronics, a Taiwan company, Proview Shenzhen and Yoke Technology, both being Shenzhen companies. Yang was at all material times the responsible person and director of Proview Electronics. He was also the legal representative, general manager and chairman of both Proview Shenzhen and Yoke Technology and remains so despite his bankruptcy."



    1b. Hence Mr. Yang is at all times the one and only person involved in this.



    1c. The "oh it's the parent company" is, well, nonsense:



    "Here, the conduct of all the defendants demonstrate that they have combined together with the common intention of injuring Apple and IP Application by acting in breach of the Agreement. Proview Holdings, Proview Electronics and Proview Shenzhen, all clearly under Yang?s control, have refused to take any steps to ensure compliance with the Agreement so that the China Trademarks are properly assigned or transferred to IP Application. Instead, they attempted to exploit the situation as a business opportunity for the Proview Group by seeking an amount of US$10,000,000 from Apple."



    So what? A Hong Kong court deciding that a Chinese Company must do something in China? Two Chinese courts disagree.
  • greginpraguegreginprague Posts: 408member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    They bought the rights in 10 countries from a Taiwanese subsidiary. That company did not own the rights in China. Instead, a different subsidiary owned the Chinese rights.



    The situation is like two brothers owning different houses in different countries. The Taiwanese brother sells all his real estate to Apple. The Chinese brother rightfully objects when Apple tries to evict him.



    The Hong Kong Father (Proview International Holdings) is who you refer to when you say "Proview" without qualification. The parent company has no obligation to throw his Chinese son out in the street due to the actions of his Taiwanese son.



    Please see the email scan from the Proview Shenzen lawyer at the bottom of the Forbes article. Then feel free to apologize for thinking you know everything about everything.



    http://www.forbes.com/sites/conniegu...ute-escalates/
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post


    Wow, I'm glad you were there and know all that went on in the communications and with the transaction. Stupid Apple for not thinking about buying the trademark for the most populous nation on earth.



    /s



    I'd be surprised if they didn't think about it. I have no idea what went on "in the communication". I base my view on "what went on in the transaction" on what the Chinese courts have said that the contracts held, and not upon guesswork.
  • greginpraguegreginprague Posts: 408member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post


    As you rightly imply, Apple is not dumb, Apple did buy the China Trademarks, again from the Hong Kong decision:



    I guess I shouldn't bother adding the "sarcasm off" symbol if people are going to ignore it...



    Yes, i know that Apple bought it. It's Zither who has his head in the sand.
  • greginpraguegreginprague Posts: 408member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    I'd be surprised if they didn't think about it. I have no idea what went on "in the communication". I base my view on "what went on in the transaction" on what the Chinese courts have said that the contracts held, and not upon guesswork.



    For one thing, Hong Kong is a part of China since 1997 I believe. The court in Hong Kong was a high court. These two court rulings are lower courts and both rulings will be overturned on appeal.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post


    Incorrect, see above. There is no brother, father, mother, sister, uncle. It's all one guy.



    Huge multinational corporations are never "one guy". Sorry.





    Here we have a Parent company, Proview International Holdings, and two subsidiary corporations, all three incorporated in separate countries.



    If you don't like the "sons" analogy, substitute "subsidiary corporation".
  • sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    So what? A Hong Kong court deciding that a Chinese Company must do something in China? Two Chinese courts disagree.



    Er.. the Hong Kong court is commenting on the Written Agreement. Unless you can show that the Written Agreement is not what the Hong Kong court says, then, you're out of luck.



    There has been systematic misleading to play the "oh the trademark is owned by etc. etc." game. C'mon guys, this is more obvious than any "Nigerian scam".



  • sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post


    I guess I shouldn't bother adding the "sarcasm off" symbol if people are going to ignore it...



    Yes, i know that Apple bought it. It's Zither who has his head in the sand.



    I know you were being sarcastic, I got it. I was backing up your original intent. I'm also not sure where Zither is going with his current train of thought.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post


    As you rightly imply, Apple is not dumb, Apple did buy the China Trademarks, again from the Hong Kong decision:



    "...The Written Agreement and the Country Assignments executed on 23 December 2009 expressly stated that Proview Electronics was the proprietor of the Subject Trademarks including the China Trademarks and that Proview Electronics warranted that it was the unencumbered sole owner of the Subject Trademarks including the China Trademarks. The Country Assignment pertaining to the China Trademarks (?the China Country Assignment?) also recited that Proview Electronics was the proprietor of the China Trademarks. However, after Apple had announced the launch of iPads in January 2010, it was discovered that the China Trademarks were in fact registered in the name of Proview Shenzhen. The China Country Assignment was accordingly ineffective in assigning the China Trademarks to IP Application."



    Great. So instead of proper due diligence, Apple got bamboozled by the Taiwanese subsidiary.



    Apple can sue them based upon the misrepresentation. But they are destitute, so good luck with that one, Apple.



    And did you ignore the conclusion of the Hong Kong Court?



    Quote:

    The China Country Assignment was accordingly ineffective in assigning the China Trademarks to IP Application



    So even the Hong Cong court has ruled that Apple does NOT own the trademark in China?
  • sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    Huge multinational corporations are never "one guy". Sorry.



    Here we have a Parent company, Proview International Holdings, and two subsidiary corporations, all three incorporated in separate countries.



    If you don't like the "sons" analogy, substitute "subsidiary corporation".



    Let's say you are right on the first point (which I assert you aren't ), may I repeat:



    "Proview Electronics warranted that it was the unencumbered sole owner of the Subject Trademarks including the China Trademarks"



    Perhaps they accidentally a whole written contract of the sale.



    See email posted above as well.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,903member
    Proview doesn't have half the money that they'd need to repay Apple in damages when they win the suit, so it looks like they've just signed their bankruptcy papers.



    Apple will probably buy it, shut it down, and keep the patents/trademarks.
  • magicfingersmagicfingers Posts: 703member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post


    I guess I shouldn't bother adding the "sarcasm off" symbol if people are going to ignore it...



    Yes, i know that Apple bought it. It's Zither who has his head in the sand.



    the head is obviously "in the ass" if you've seen the other posts from this troll.... ignore list works fine if other people would quit replying to the trolls, and stop quoting their ridiculous comments..
  • maciekskontaktmaciekskontakt Posts: 230member
    Let me pu this way: some decided to do buisness with mafia. After some time mafia came to "partner" and asked for 90% shares in profits.



    Some people do not believe it or try to be blind. China is not free market coutry and it is manipulated by regime. Regime has courts in it its pockets. That's how it works in this stystem. I lived in this system. I was born in it. The only difference was it was Eastern Europe.



    Lamenting over morons.
  • sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    Great. So instead of proper due diligence, Apple got bamboozled by the Taiwanese subsidiary.



    No, they got bamboozled by Mr. Yang.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    And did you ignore the conclusion of the Hong Kong Court?



    So even the Hong Cong court has ruled that Apple does NOT own the trademark in China?



    More importantly, they mention that the assignment of the China Trademark to Apple was not done by Mr. Yang.
  • sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by maciekskontakt View Post


    Let me pu this way: some decided to do buisness with mafia. After some time mafia came to "partner" and asked for 90% shares in profits.



    Some people do not believe it or try to be blind. China is not free market coutry and it is manipulated by regime. Regime has courts in it its pockets. That's how it works in this stystem. I lived in this system. I was born in it. The only difference was it was Eastern Europe.



    Lamenting over morons.



    Thank you. That's what I've been trying to contribute here, that really, Asia, is the new wild wild west.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MagicFingers View Post


    the head is obviously "in the ass" if you've seen the other posts from this troll.... ignore list works fine if other people would quit replying to the trolls, and stop quoting their ridiculous comments..



    I would love to, but at this stage in the game I can't let it pass.
  • charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,068member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post


    Indeed, but it doesn't really matter because Mr. Yang, the guy in charge of all Proview companies including Proview Shenzen, sold all the use of iPad in various regions including mainland China to Apple at the end of 2009.



    That's what Apple is arguing. Well that they sold it to the proxy who then sold it to Apple. But Proview is saying no, they sold the rights to the countries they had the rights to, which didn't include China.



    And a court in Hong Kong has basically said that the papers signed by Proview don't reflect said company's view and this claim is BS. That Apple has the rights in China. But due to the weird court arrangement in China, that court's finding only applies in Hong Kong. And the Chinese courts don't agree with the ruling.



    What is left is likely to sue the parent company for acting in bad faith by them claiming to be selling rights they didn't actually hold. Which comes off like they were fine with some little company having the rights and wouldn't have said anything had it not turned out that the UK company was working on Apple's behalf (meaning that Proview feels they undersold the 'mark and would have demanded more money if they had known it was Apple etc)



    Until then, I think Apple should halt all official sales and demand that the Chinese government support the import ban. Focus on keeping the exports in place until the iPad can be moved out of China and then do it. Loss of those jobs might change the courts minds.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post


    Please see the email scan from the Proview Shenzen lawyer at the bottom of the Forbes article. Then feel free to apologize for thinking you know everything about everything.



    http://www.forbes.com/sites/conniegu...ute-escalates/



    I read it. Thanks.



    He refers to "the trademark". Maybe he was referring to the trademark owned by the Taiwanese?



    Maybe he was ignorant? Maybe he was mistaken? Maybe he was bamboozled too? Maybe he was in on the plan to fool Apple? Maybe ...



    The letter is ambiguous as to the basic subject matter, and even if you assume he is referring to the Chinese trademark, it is not effective to show any transfer of that mark. At best, it is evidence that Apple was defrauded by the bankrupt Taiwanese subsidiary. good luck getting blood from a turnip.
  • charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,068member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    Wrong. Apple never bought the Chinese rights to the name. They dealt with a Taiwanese subsidiary who did not own the rights in China.



    Oops.



    While this is apparently true, according to Apple who likely has the papers to back up the claim, Proview Taiwan didn't tell them that the "global" rights didn't include China at the time of purchase and in fact very possibly implied that the term did include said country.



    it was only revealed after the Apple connection was. And if Apple's argument is correct, which the courts in Hong Kong say is, then Proview lied, or at least recanted, on said rights after discovering they could have gotten more money for the whole deal.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post




    The situation is like two brothers owning different houses in different countries. The Taiwanese brother sells all his real estate to Apple. The Chinese brother rightfully objects when Apple tries to evict him..



    Except that it wasn't the brother that sold the land. It was the Father, whose name is on the deed to both and thus is the legal owner.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post


    I guess I shouldn't bother adding the "sarcasm off" symbol if people are going to ignore it...



    Yes, i know that Apple bought it. It's Zither who has his head in the sand.



    Apple seems to have bought the China trademark from a company that did not own it.



    The situation is similar to a tourist who buys the Brooklyn Bridge from some guy on the street.
  • sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    That's what Apple is arguing. Well that they sold it to the proxy who then sold it to Apple. But Proview is saying no, they sold the rights to the countries they had the rights to, which didn't include China.



    That's right, and that beggars the question, how would Proview [again, just the same guy in charge of everything] block any iPad sales in China, when it promised that it would sell it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    But due to the weird court arrangement in China, that court's finding only applies in Hong Kong. And the Chinese courts don't agree with the ruling.



    Given that Hong Kong was only handed back to China just over 10 years ago, luckily, it's not fully integrated with the mainland yet. The mainland is where the action is in any case.



    Interestingly, a mainland Chinese court has sided with Apple, but again, even though a mainland Chinese court rules, it doesn't mean it can apply to the whole of China:



    "On 24 May 2010, [Apple and IP Applications] instituted proceedings against Proview Shenzhen in the Shenzhen Intermediate People?s Court and filed an application for APO (asset preservation order) in respect of the China Trademarks. The application was granted on 12 June 2010 but subject to the APOs obtained by some other Mainland banks"



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    What is left is likely to sue the parent company for acting in bad faith by them claiming to be selling rights they didn't actually hold. Which comes off like they were fine with some little company having the rights and wouldn't have said anything had it not turned out that the UK company was working on Apple's behalf (meaning that Proview feels they undersold the 'mark and would have demanded more money if they had known it was Apple etc)



    Bingo. Which beggars the question again, how would this lead to Chinese authorities confiscating iPads? That's the disconnect.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    Until then, I think Apple should halt all official sales and demand that the Chinese government support the import ban. Focus on keeping the exports in place until the iPad can be moved out of China and then do it. Loss of those jobs might change the courts minds.



    I think Apple should ignore the Chinese government, to be honest. Can't sell in China? Too bad, just continue manufacturing until like you say, they can move out [which the Chinese will never let].
Sign In or Register to comment.