Apple tells court banning iPad sales would 'hurt China's national interest'
Apple and Proview, the company challenging over the use of the "iPad" name, squared off in court in Shanghai on Wednesday, where Apple argued that a ban on iPad sales would be a negative for the nation of China.
"Proview has no product, no markets, no customers and no suppliers. It has nothing," Hu Jinnan, a lawyer representing Apple, told the court, according to Reuters. "Apple has huge sales in China. Its fans line up to buy Apple products. The ban, if executed, would not only hurt Apple sales but it would also hurt China's national interest."
More than 100 reporters were present for the hearing. A ruling from the Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Court is expected to be handed down soon.
Proview has contended that it owns the rights to the iPad name, and seeks to halt sales of Apple's hot-selling tablet in China. The company has even has some small successes in having units pulled from shelves in a handful of cities.
Officials with Proview indicated once again on Wednesday that they are open to settle with Apple out of court. Roger Xie, a lawyer representing Proview, said negotiations have not yet begun, but a settlement outside of the court is "quite possible."
Proview's ownership of the iPad name stems from a product it released in 1999 with the same name. It was a basic desktop computer that was designed to be easy to use.
Proview believes that Apple's purchase of the iPad name from one of its Taiwanese affiliates was an unauthorized transaction. For its part, Apple has contended that Proview "refuses to honor" the existing agreement between the two companies.
As its struggles against Proview have dragged on, Apple this week threatened to sue the company for defamation. Apple has claimed that Proview has released false and misleading statements to the press.
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Comments
"Proview has no product, no markets, no customers and no suppliers. It has nothing," Hu Jinnan, a lawyer representing Apple, told the court, according to Reuters. "Apple has huge sales in China. Its fans line up to buy Apple products. The ban, if executed, would not only hurt Apple sales but it would also hurt China's national interest."
Weak. Very weak.
What happenend to "We bought it fair and square"?
What happened to "Look at these emails"?
On an unrelated note, I thought I recognised that Proview logo from somewhere - then I remembered that we used to sell them when I was working at PC World back during the late 90's and early 00's.
They were pretty good quality at the time. Here is a review I found on one of them...
Nevertheless, I find it odd that Apple's lawyers talk about the impact of the verdict on China. It also seems strange that the judge would say that iPad sales could not be stopped because it is popular. Seems to me, the case should be decided based on points of law and not what is difficult or most profitable...
What happenend to "We bought it fair and square"?
What happened to "Look at these emails"?
I would assume these legal arguments were presented as well, but adding this political consideration seems apropriate in a country known for a judicial system that takes politics into consideration...
Weak. Very weak.
What happenend to "We bought it fair and square"?
What happened to "Look at these emails"?
Apparently "fair and square" along with physical evidence has failed to persuade the courts. That being the case, Apple is now speeking a language the court should understand...
Hmm.. interesting argument
On an unrelated note, I thought I recognised that Proview logo from somewhere - then I remembered that we used to sell them when I was working at PC World back during the late 90's and early 00's.
I had a Proview monitor at work a million years ago. It had accessory speakers that could be attached to the sides. Back in the "multimedia computer" days.
It was a POS.
Nevertheless, I find it odd that Apple's lawyers talk about the impact of the verdict on China. It also seems strange that the judge would say that iPad sales could not be stopped because it is popular. Seems to me, the case should be decided based on points of law and not what is difficult or most profitable...
My assumption is that these arguments are a way for Proview to save face, and perhaps allow for a modest settlement, rather than telling Proview they have no case at all, or they are acting in bad faith.
Assuming that Apple will settle for a "lower" amount to avoid a complete breakdown of the global iPad business and manufacturing within the People's Republic of China.
The reporting on this issue has been strange. I don't know the finer legal points, though I see the logic in each side's claims. It really comes down to legal details on the transaction that few of us here are qualified to speak on. (I happen to fall into the category that thinks that the seller is trying to break the contract because they realize they WAY underpriced their product, but I cannot be certain that they don't have a legal point in their favor.)
Nevertheless, I find it odd that Apple's lawyers talk about the impact of the verdict on China. It also seems strange that the judge would say that iPad sales could not be stopped because it is popular. Seems to me, the case should be decided based on points of law and not what is difficult or most profitable...
First of all, I would think Apple advanced several other legal arguments but the reporter just chose to highlight those statements about national interest because they are more interesting.
Second, this is not a U.S. court. This is a court in a communist country and based on other pronouncements I've read supposedly by Chinese courts, a judge represents the interests of the state because the interests of the state are built into the law.
Thirdly, I'm no expert on the topic so my opinion is as good as anyone else's. Digest all of the above with a grain of salt.
Apple and Proview, the company challenging over the use of the "iPad" name, squared off in court in Shanghai on Wednesday, where Apple argued that a ban on iPad sales would be a negative for the nation of China.
...
A ban on iPad in China would be about as much a negative for the nation of China as a ban on game consoles.
A ban on iPad in China would be about as much a negative for the nation of China as a ban on game consoles.
-ve for the nation? Not really. Most people are buying the iPads from the smugglers anyway.
Also, when did the Chinese government care about whether a decision is -ve for the nation? When did the Chinese government care about the rule of law?
You can't use logic there, the only way to get through this is to use relationship. That's it. The sooner AAPL recognizes this, the sooner this is put to bed. It's silly to try to fight this, they've $100B, they can easily bribe a few officials' sons and be done with it.
Weak. Very weak.
What happenend to "We bought it fair and square"?
What happened to "Look at these emails"?
The argument about hurting the Chinese national interest is only about the question of banning iPad sales, not about the underlying trademark dispute. Proview wants a ban on iPad sales before the trademark dispute is finally settled. Since Proview has no product, no sales, no competing "iPad" product, no nothing, they are not harmed by continued sale of the iPad. Obviously Apple would be harmed, but Apple's alleging also a harm to China from a ban on the sale of Apple's iPad.
-ve for the nation? Not really. Most people are buying the iPads from the smugglers anyway.
Also, when did the Chinese government care about whether a decision is -ve for the nation? When did the Chinese government care about the rule of law?
You can't use logic there, the only way to get through this is to use relationship. That's it. The sooner AAPL recognizes this, the sooner this is put to bed. It's silly to try to fight this, they've $100B, they can easily bribe a few officials' sons and be done with it.
Once you open that Pandora's box, you can't close it. Better to tell the official's sons to go to hell. $100b is also enough to keep them boxed up waiting for bribes up to the grave. They have a lot of officials with a lot of sons.
Don't confuse "the nation" with "the rule of law" or "the people." If the Chinese government can be convinced that the ban would harm the Chinese government, that will be a powerful factor.
Nevertheless, I find it odd that Apple's lawyers talk about the impact of the verdict on China. It also seems strange that the judge would say that iPad sales could not be stopped because it is popular. Seems to me, the case should be decided based on points of law and not what is difficult or most profitable...
If you think of it this way it is not so odd. China has developed the most flexible and modern manufacturing system in the world. There is a reason why electronics are built there. However, if companies in China do not respect legal agreements or the Legal environment is so obfuscated that foreign companies cannot purchase a trademark or name with assurance, that becomes a huge issue. If doing business in China leaves a company open to legal problems like this... It will negate the pluses of manufacturing in China.
Apple is trying to point this out to the Chinese legal system.
If you think of it this way it is not so odd. China has developed the most flexible and modern manufacturing system in the world...
... ever since they took over from the Egyptians...
Oh, and as an added bonus to the only "law" many Chinese courts understand, politics. I would make it clear that with Brazil's plant coming online soon for manufacturing the iPad that perhaps it would be best if Apple moved all of their iPad production out of China.
Heck, why stop there. Perhaps they need to move all of their production out of China. I hear that Africa has some mighty cheap labor and I am sure more than a few countries would climb all over each other to have the billions dollars Apple invest into an economy when it makes a product there.
Hmm.. interesting argument
On an unrelated note, I thought I recognised that Proview logo from somewhere - then I remembered that we used to sell them when I was working at PC World back during the late 90's and early 00's.
They were pretty good quality at the time. Here is a review I found on one of them...
well, if proview wants to win this, get a way-back-machine, and place an ad for their "eye-pad" in BYTE magazine, or the "computer shopper", "pc world"...
ya that's it... proview forgot that they named it "eye pad"... NOT "ipad"...