Apple not allowed to call an iPad an iPad in China!, Ha Ha! Pwned! Options

[mohawk]

APPLE Inc has lost a trademark dispute in China, where it had accused Proview Technology (Shenzhen) of infringing on its iPad trademark.

A Chinese court rejected the lawsuit, ruling that Proview - a unit of Proview International Holdings Ltd - had lawfully registered the "iPad" name as far back as 2000 for use in China and other countries, MarketWatch reported.

Proview's Taiwan based unit had sold the "global trademark" to a UK-based company called IP Application Development for £35,000 ($55,104) in 2006, the Shanghai Daily reported. That company then transferred the trademark to Apple.

But Proview Technology (Shenzhen) says the trademark for China's mainland market was not included in that agreement because the company's Taiwan unit did not own it at the time.

The court agreed, ruling that the Shenzhen-based company holds the rights to the iPad trademark in the Chinese market, the Daily reported.

Proview is seeking $1 billion-plus compensation from Apple for copyright infringement.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breakin...3-1226216561991


Since Apple loves taking others to court you would at least think they would have had all the facts right before they did this epic fail!

I'

[Zzozzach]

Since Apple loves taking others to court you would at least think they would have had all the facts right before they did this epic fail!

Not necessarily. They got into strife in the USA over the name 'iPhone' because Cisco claimed they had already used it on a previous product. You'd expect that one would've been glaringly obvious.

There's an enormous number of names, trademarks, and permutations of them (not to mention all the different jurisdictions) around the world. When you start looking into the issue of trademarks and product names you'll see that it's quite easy to miss some.

[Xen]

I was surprised when Cisco gave them that much leniency over using IOS to describe the OS.

[p0is0n]

serves them right for being so lazy with their product names, and for taking so many other companies to court over this kind of stupid shit.
in my opinion they should abolish these kind of laws, all they do is make things worse.

what would really be the worst that could happen if the only thing that was copyrighted/patented, was what you kept to yourself.
once you 'release' your idea to the world, it becomes free knowledge.

This post has been edited by p0is(+)n: Dec 8 2011, 12:59 PM

[darklife41]

If it wasn't for lawyers, we wouldn't need lawyers.

Personally, as I hate everything Apple, I'm quite happy to see them lose for a change and hope this sets a precident for future lawsuits. Fuck Apple. :-)

[G-relk]

Two words: Suck shit!!

About friggin' time apple got sued for some stupid shit like this, especially after the massive lawsuit with Samsung over the galaxy tab

[vestige]

Intellectual property rights drive creation.

Without copyright laws there would be no incentive for people to invent things and we would all be a lot worse off.

That is all.

[A Hitman]

Intellectual property rights drive creation.

Without copyright laws there would be no incentive for people to invent things and we would all be a lot worse off.

That is all.

This had nothing to do with IP, this is a trademark issue.

And getting a patent on "bounce animations" which is what it has boiled down to overseas is just dumb.

[vestige]

Yeah, you're right. There is a massive gulf between the concepts of IP and trademarks... zzz (You are aware that trademarks come under the umbrella of IP law right?)

Moreover, my reply was more in response to the "If it wasn't for lawyers, we wouldn't need lawyers" comment.

This post has been edited by vestige: Dec 8 2011, 04:01 PM

[Jeruselem]

Apple got their own medicine although I still think submarine IP should be stopped.

[TinBane]

Sounds like a lot of you guys haven't worked in a field that involves IP.
It's a murky, horrible world of lawyers.
Odds are, some UK company that sold the Ipad portfolio will get their butt kicked, because China is probably on the list.

[darklife41]

Yeah, you're right. There is a massive gulf between the concepts of IP and trademarks... zzz (You are aware that trademarks come under the umbrella of IP law right?)

Moreover, my reply was more in response to the "If it wasn't for lawyers, we wouldn't need lawyers" comment.

Spoken like a true lawyer wanna be. Apple has contributed to frivolous law suits time and again. Either you know that, or you support the law suit mentality that has helped to create the world's financial crisis and overpricing of everything on the planet. Either way, your opinion is obviously not shared by the bulk of these responses. :-)

[vestige]

What makes you think I'm a wanna be?

I'm not arguing that Apple don't sue the pants off everyone they can. Some of them are frivolous and some of them aren't. Lots of companies do this.

Regardless, the idea of blaming lawyers for this sort of stuff is just ridiculous. Lawyers don't drive corporate greed. They take instructions from people who do.

Also, as I've previously said, IP laws are necessary as they provide an incentive for invention. You say the laws should be abolished because Apple may push the issue from time to time... but what about all the little guys that these laws protect?

You think its only ever the big guy pushing people around? What about the AMD suits against Intel?

I really don't care whether my opinion is shared or not. IP laws are crucial. Litigation is just one aspect of a system that is providing positive protection for rights day in, day out. And I don't recall anyone ever seriously suggesting that the GFC had anything to do with lawsuits. Maybe if you're talking about insurance as it relates to medical negligence cases? Otherwise I don't really know what you're on about, and that has nothing to do with the GFC anyway.

[iamthemaxx]

Intellectual property rights drive creation.

Without copyright laws there would be no incentive for people to invent things and we would all be a lot worse off.

That is all.

So you're saying without IP laws all those inventions wouldn't happen?
That's like saying that artists would create without copyright, but I'm pretty sure that the thousands of preceding years of artistic and cultural creation would kinda argue against that.

[vestige]

Why do you think products like the ipad get created these days? So someone else can take the idea for free?

What would be the benefit in pumping money into creating something new and exciting if someone could just steal your invention the day it is released?

When you refer to thousands of years ago you're also talking about a time when things weren't mass produced, and couldn't be copied similarly. With the advent of modern technology IP becomes far more relevant.

It's hard to respond because your statements are so broad brush. What are "all those inventions"? What exactly do you mean by "artistic and cultural creation"? Can you be more specific? Intellectual property rights become more relevant as time passes due to modern technology allowing for duplication, and similar such considerations, and also the fact that most products are invented to be sold purely for financial gain.

[iamthemaxx]

I mean our cultural heritage, everything from day 0 to now. Same with inventions.
Was the wheel invented because IP laws protected the creator from other people copying them?

People don't invent or create stuff purely because IP and copyright drives them to do so. That's balls.

[vestige]

I'm not trying to argue that every single invention ever is as a result of IP laws. That would be silly.

It's equally silly to say that because IP laws were not necessary to encourage an invention as basic as the wheel that they don't have that effect now.

When you're talking about inventions such as the wheel, or fire, or all of those inventions that are basically fundamental to human survival obviously IP is irrelevant. But that isn't why people invent these days. They create products with the end goal of financial gain.

I'm not enough of an apple fan to keep talking about things like the invention of the ipad in the same category as the invention of the wheel. Are you? haha

[TinBane]

I mean our cultural heritage, everything from day 0 to now. Same with inventions.
Was the wheel invented because IP laws protected the creator from other people copying them?

People don't invent or create stuff purely because IP and copyright drives them to do so. That's balls.

It depends on the product, doesn't it?

I agree, not every musician or artist made work because of IP law.
However, look at other fields. In medicine, there are a lot of beneficial drugs that only exist because the billions sunk in their creation will be repaid over the life of the drug before it's IP protections lapse.
I'm the last person that would defend the pharmaceutical companies (having decided never to work for them, to my own cost) but their genuine investment, needs to be protected.
Likewise, development in electronic products can be extremely costly. If you develop something better than everyone else, you deserve to reap some reward.

If IP protections didn't exist, then anyone could rip of the linux kernel and all GPL software to their hearts content. The entire linux concept, only works because of IP law, regardless of whether they are asking for money. Corporate greed, and patent ever-greening is a separate issue. There are a lot of shoddy patent offices, and shoddy patents, that reduce innovation. At the same time, for those serious in investing their money in good inventions, they are important.

Without patents, the lowest common denominator would simply be price.
Which means chinese knock-offs.

[ameel]

Haha, calm down peeps. this story is just funny XD maybe we should go about and register "i-XX" trademarks, and hope to sell those trademarks for few millions to apple in the future? xD isn't that trademark-jacking or something? i doubt the chinese IPAD had that in mind (since they go way back to 2000 apparently), but if trademark-jacking isn't illegal, then it could be a lucrative business (y)