Aside from all the other BS in this case, here are two trademark-relevent questions for the Chinese courts:
1. Is an acronymic IPAD the same thing as an Apple iPad, which is part of a world-renowned family of iConic (couldn't resist) devices including the iPhone and iPod.
2. Is a non-expert consumer likely to be confused by the two names? In other words might a consumer accidentally purchase an iPad when he or she really wanted a cheap, fugly, outdated, CRT-based iMac ripoff that doesn't appear to be made any more?
Just asking...
Well IPAD was trademarked in the computer/electronics industry. So it doesn't matter if one's an acronym and one's not. Just like you can't call a new gadget an Ibm. IBM is trademarked by IBM.
Well IPAD was trademarked in the computer/electronics industry. So it doesn't matter if one's an acronym and one's not. Just like you can't call a new gadget an Ibm. IBM is trademarked by IBM.
Yes, but under U.S. trademark law, I believe you have to have something in the market to maintain your mark, and consumer confusion usually figures into the occasion.
Proview doesn't have a leg to stand on. Notice it's only lower courts that side with Proview. China isn't a really a "Rule of Law" society. but it is much more so WRT major businesses. As the case is appealed to less easily influenced venues, the validity of Apple's ownership of the trademark will be confirmed. Proview is just very desperate for $$$ and feels like legal blackmail might be a fertile tactic.
So would you really take the time to lie, cheat and steal before deploying the Ninjas? Seems inefficient.
I don't see bribing a corrupt judge or two as doing something wrong or unethical. China is an extremely corrupt country, so you have to lower yourself to their level when playing with them. That's the pragmatic and rational view to adopt.
Nah they just need to bribe these chinese judges twice as high as proview does. It can't be that much, since they are broke already.
I don't know where you get the idea that China is broke. They are the one's with most of the money, they have a massive balance of payments surplus and have bought up loads of assets in the West. We are in hock to them - it's an inconvenient and uncomfortable fact. Also believe it or not there are people in countries other than Switzerland who are not susceptible to bribes.
Take a look at the evidence linked below. It clearly shows that Proview and the Banks that seized Proview's assets are crooked to the core and desperate.
Although most of us on this blog are English speakers the Chinese only speak it as a second language. There has to be a Chinese equivalent in their characters that wouldn't violate the trademark dispute and would probably endear Apple even more to Chinese consumers. After all the word iPad means nothing to the Chinese I just hate the way that these issues bring out the latent xenophobia!
What about i道 iTao!!?
The 'Tao' 道 would really mean something in Chinese - 道 Tao (pronounced Dao) is a Chinese word meaning 'way', 'path', 'route'. of course you'd have to be careful it didn't offend sensibilities because of it's religious connotations..... could be as bad as them serving 'slow-boiled cat' to an American cat lover!
This is rediculous. This is one ruling in one city for one retailer. The retailer will appeal, as will Apple not to mention Apple's countersuit(s). True this ruling could be used as precedent in other cities but the appeal should take care of that. This is getting way more press than it should.
Proview are just pissed off that they didn't know it was apple that wanted to buy the iPad name. Apple used a 3rd party from the UK to broker the deal and proview sold to them for £35,000. When they found out it was actually Apple they must have been solo pissed off for selling it for a pittance that they would have another crack at Apple to get millions for it.
However it appears that Proview China did agree to sell the iPad name and Apples lawyers have copies of communications to back this up.
Either way it makes Proview look utterly foolish and bitter.
Proview are just pissed off that they didn't know it was apple that wanted to buy the iPad name. Apple used a 3rd party from the UK to broker the deal and proview sold to them for £35,000. When they found out it was actually Apple they must have been solo pissed off for selling it for a pittance that they would have another crack at Apple to get millions for it.
However it appears that Proview China did agree to sell the iPad name and Apples lawyers have copies of communications to back this up.
Either way it makes Proview look utterly foolish and bitter.
Exactly. Look at their complaint. They argue that "the company surreptitiously acquired the trademark". So what? It happens all the time. There's nothing illegal or unethical about it.
Seller's remorse is all it is. And they're going to get slapped down hard.
Yeah, we sold you our trademark, but now we're broke, so we'll sue you saying we did not authorize our subsidiary to sell you the trademark. And even though we might have misled you into thinking you own the trademark, you must apologize and pay.
I don't know where you get the idea that China is broke. They are the one's with most of the money, they have a massive balance of payments surplus and have bought up loads of assets in the West. We are in hock to them - it's an inconvenient and uncomfortable fact. Also believe it or not there are people in countries other than Switzerland who are not susceptible to bribes.
Nobody said china is broke, neihter did I. But Proview certainly is. And such blatantly misjudging by the local court can only be explained by criminal behaviour like being bribed.
Comments
Let's see. About 45 units were removed from the shelves.
That will allow Samsung and Lenovo to double their sales.
BEST LAUGH IN A WHILE
So insightful
Aside from all the other BS in this case, here are two trademark-relevent questions for the Chinese courts:
1. Is an acronymic IPAD the same thing as an Apple iPad, which is part of a world-renowned family of iConic (couldn't resist) devices including the iPhone and iPod.
2. Is a non-expert consumer likely to be confused by the two names? In other words might a consumer accidentally purchase an iPad when he or she really wanted a cheap, fugly, outdated, CRT-based iMac ripoff that doesn't appear to be made any more?
Just asking...
Well IPAD was trademarked in the computer/electronics industry. So it doesn't matter if one's an acronym and one's not. Just like you can't call a new gadget an Ibm. IBM is trademarked by IBM.
Well IPAD was trademarked in the computer/electronics industry. So it doesn't matter if one's an acronym and one's not. Just like you can't call a new gadget an Ibm. IBM is trademarked by IBM.
Yes, but under U.S. trademark law, I believe you have to have something in the market to maintain your mark, and consumer confusion usually figures into the occasion.
I'm guessing Chinese law is different.
Proview doesn't have a leg to stand on. Notice it's only lower courts that side with Proview. China isn't a really a "Rule of Law" society. but it is much more so WRT major businesses. As the case is appealed to less easily influenced venues, the validity of Apple's ownership of the trademark will be confirmed. Proview is just very desperate for $$$ and feels like legal blackmail might be a fertile tactic.
Just throw them more Cheetos.
This is a multi billion dollar business, a lot is at stake. People have been killed for a lot less money.
I suggest bribing the corrupt Chinese judges, and as a last alternative, Apple hitmen and secret ninjas to rectify the problem.
as a last alternative, Apple hitmen and secret ninjas to rectify the problem.
So would you really take the time to lie, cheat and steal before deploying the Ninjas? Seems inefficient.
Let's see. About 45 units were removed from the shelves.
That will allow Samsung and Lenovo to double their sales.
Maybe Tripple their sales
So would you really take the time to lie, cheat and steal before deploying the Ninjas? Seems inefficient.
I don't see bribing a corrupt judge or two as doing something wrong or unethical. China is an extremely corrupt country, so you have to lower yourself to their level when playing with them. That's the pragmatic and rational view to adopt.
Nah they just need to bribe these chinese judges twice as high as proview does. It can't be that much, since they are broke already.
I don't know where you get the idea that China is broke. They are the one's with most of the money, they have a massive balance of payments surplus and have bought up loads of assets in the West. We are in hock to them - it's an inconvenient and uncomfortable fact. Also believe it or not there are people in countries other than Switzerland who are not susceptible to bribes.
http://allthingsd.com/20120216/take-...-ipad-dispute/
How can a court look at this evidence and side with Proview?
Apple has every right to go Thermo Nuclear on Proview.
What misfortune? Apple could easily just make a change to the name for China only.
I hereby propose the name "ChiPad".
There. It's part of the public domain, and nobody else can copyright it.
What about i道 iTao!!?
The 'Tao' 道 would really mean something in Chinese - 道 Tao (pronounced Dao) is a Chinese word meaning 'way', 'path', 'route'. of course you'd have to be careful it didn't offend sensibilities because of it's religious connotations..... could be as bad as them serving 'slow-boiled cat' to an American cat lover!
However it appears that Proview China did agree to sell the iPad name and Apples lawyers have copies of communications to back this up.
Either way it makes Proview look utterly foolish and bitter.
Proview are just pissed off that they didn't know it was apple that wanted to buy the iPad name. Apple used a 3rd party from the UK to broker the deal and proview sold to them for £35,000. When they found out it was actually Apple they must have been solo pissed off for selling it for a pittance that they would have another crack at Apple to get millions for it.
However it appears that Proview China did agree to sell the iPad name and Apples lawyers have copies of communications to back this up.
Either way it makes Proview look utterly foolish and bitter.
Exactly. Look at their complaint. They argue that "the company surreptitiously acquired the trademark". So what? It happens all the time. There's nothing illegal or unethical about it.
Seller's remorse is all it is. And they're going to get slapped down hard.
The apology part cracks me up.
Yeah, we sold you our trademark, but now we're broke, so we'll sue you saying we did not authorize our subsidiary to sell you the trademark. And even though we might have misled you into thinking you own the trademark, you must apologize and pay.
"If you aim at someone and want to pull trigger then make sure you have nobody behind your back to give you kick in your butt"
Confucius says:
"If you aim at someone and want to pull trigger then make sure you have nobody behind your back to give you kick in your butt"
Here I thought Confucius said something about a man, an itchy rectum, going to sleep, and a stinky finger.
I don't know where you get the idea that China is broke. They are the one's with most of the money, they have a massive balance of payments surplus and have bought up loads of assets in the West. We are in hock to them - it's an inconvenient and uncomfortable fact. Also believe it or not there are people in countries other than Switzerland who are not susceptible to bribes.
Nobody said china is broke, neihter did I. But Proview certainly is. And such blatantly misjudging by the local court can only be explained by criminal behaviour like being bribed.
Get it? Else I am sorry for my bad english.