Slashdot Mirror


Apple Could Lose $1.6 Billion In iPad Lawsuit

redletterdave writes "Proview Technology, which currently uses the 'iPad' name on several of its products including computer monitors, stands to win up to $1.6 billion and an apology from Apple for allegedly infringing upon Proview's trademarked name to use on its bestselling tablet. Proview International, which owns subsidiaries Proview Technology in Shenzhen and Proview Electronics in Taiwan, originally registered the name 'iPad' in Taiwan in 2000 and mainland China in 2001. Proview eventually sued Apple in 2011, and even though the Cupertino-based company retaliated with a counter-suit of its own, Apple lost the case in local Chinese courts. Depending on the court's findings, Apple could be fined anywhere from $38 million to the $1.6 billion that Proview is seeking. In addition to the money, Proview also wants Apple to apologize. 'We have prepared well for a long-term legal battle,' said one of Proview's lawyers."

7 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Good by jythie · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, if you read the piece, they bought the name off the company before they started marketing the iPad, but now the company is coming back and claiming that Apple only purchased the name for use outside China. So either they did a real dumb, or this company is trying to use local corruption to shake money out of a foreign company that they backstabed and are trying to double dip on the deal.

  2. Isn't the summary missing something? by PickyH3D · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apple supposedly purchase the trademark in 2009 from Proview, but it appears that they may have bought it from their Taiwanese counterparts, which the Chinese portion is using to its advantage. China being China, they are choosing to side with the Chinese-based business.

    If China awards the company anything remotely close to $1 billion, then I hope Apple pulls out of China. Wishful thinking as it is, it would be interesting to watch. I also hope all such companies fail, but that's pretty obvious.

  3. Re:Good by Alan+Shutko · · Score: 5, Informative

    You need to read the history on this one before commenting. It's not a simple matter. In this case, Apple bought the mark from an intermediary who bought the global rights from Proview (Taiwan). Apple claims they bought the rights outright, Proview claims that the china rights were held by a second subsidiary, Proview (Shenzhen)

    From http://www.marbridgeconsulting.com/marbridgedaily/archive/article/53231/update_apple_appeals_ipad_trademark_lawsuit#When:12:00:00Z

    Apple laid forth a number of views in its appeal, including that the case should be adjudged according to the laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; that Proview (Shenzhen) had given written authorization for Proview International Holdings' Taiwan subsidiary, Proview Electronic, to sign a trademark transfer agreement, under the principle of unnamed agency, meaning that all iPad-related trademarks should be considered by the court to have already been transferred by Proview (Shenzhen) to Apple. Apple will also name Proview Electronic as a defendant in the case.

  4. Re:ROC vrs PRC by amicusNYCL · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Chinese arm of the company is filing the lawsuit. Not sure witch is the parent company. I would assume the Tiawan based one since that is who Apple paid.

    Both companies are subsidiaries of a larger parent company.

    Proview International, which owns subsidiaries Proview Technology in Shenzhen and Proview Electronics in Taiwan, originally registered the name 'iPad' in Taiwan in 2000 and mainland China in 2001.

    Apple bought the trademark from Proview Electronics, and they are now being sued by Proview Technology. Both companies are owned by Proview International, which is based in Hong Kong.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  5. Re:And Apple's Worried? by JDG1980 · · Score: 5, Informative

    you realize that Apple relies on cheap Chinese slave labor to make iPads at $499/ea, right? And if Apple pulled out of China they'd have nowhere else to go. America isn't an option because of labor regulations and an expensive workforce. iPads would be up at $1499 and still losing money, iPhones would be $1000 subsidized and America's economy would take a larger nosedive than China's. Brazil? They've already tried that and it's as bad as America.

    Bullshit. The differences in manufacturing costs amount to a few dollars per unit. From the New York Times:

    the cost, excluding the materials, of building a $1,500 computer in Elk Grove [California] was $22 a machine. In Singapore, it was $6. In Taiwan, $4.85.

    So we're talking about $22, not $1000. You're off by over an order of magnitude. Sure, moving the supply chains from China to the USA would be a big challenge, but that's a one-time expense.

  6. Re:And Apple's Worried? by narcc · · Score: 5, Informative

    America isn't an option because of labor regulations and an expensive workforce. iPads would be up at $1499 and still losing money

    Bullshit See thisForbes article.

    Using the correct labor costs of assembling an iPad 2 in the U.S., an iPad 2 made in the U.S would cost $445 ($325 for parts + $120 for labor), as opposed to a Chinese iPad’s cost of $335 ($325 for parts + $10 for labor). Assembling the iPad 2 in the U.S. and selling it for $729 would bring Apple’s gross margin down to 39%, not the 15.25% cited to by Mr. Thompson.

    That a 39% margin vs. the current 54% margin.

  7. Re:What about MaxiPad? by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Informative

    You joke but you have to admit during the MHz wars things were easier to track, faster was better and the PR rating would give you a pretty good idea when it came to AMD VS Intel. Hell look at the old Athlon and Phenom, Athlon was the budget chip, phenom the more high end, the number by the X told you how many cores and faster was better, simple really.

    Now good luck telling shit without a lookup table! Quick tell me what an A4-3300 is? did you say a quad core? WRONG its a dual, WTF? Quick what features separate the i3 2100 from the i5 2500? Does either of those tell you jack shit without a lookup table? NO. Hell the only nice thing i can say is at least AMD isn't playing feature roulette, unlike Intel which you can't tell which ones support which features without a chart, even the bobcat at least does support all the features.

    Frankly i think the whole thing is designed to fuck customers, that is the only reason I can think of. it makes it damned near impossible to do a simple side by side comparison of anything, either from different manufacturers or even of the same manufacturers products, so the ONLY thing people can do is "higher priced must be better" which of course don't really tell you shit except it costs more.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.