Apple can't call an iPad an iPad in China, says court.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/profit/apple-loses-lawsuit-has-to-pay-1-6bn-or-rename-ipad-in-china-293628

by adhipg • 15 years ago

48 41 15 years ago

ndtv.com

mrkmcknz• 15 years ago

For some bizarre reason this made me smile.

zalew• 15 years ago

I'd smile even more if the chinese company was a manufacturer of those cheap knock-offs

elithrar• 15 years ago

I think it's extremely unlikely Apple would sell the iPad under any other name. The 'brand' is too strong—and is probably worth $1.6b to them.

nodata• 15 years ago

$1.6b in lost sales? Even if Apple call it something else, everyone will still call it an iPad.

If I were Apple I'd come up with a name unique to the Chinese market.

martingordon2• 15 years ago

$1.6B is nothing to Apple. They had $80B in cash at the end of September and could very well pass $100B after the holidays.

I don't think there's any way Apple will dilute the brand of one of their flagship products in their hottest market. Plus, it works both ways: they would have to find a trademark that works everywhere else so that competitors don't snatch up the new trademark in other countries.

sirn• 15 years ago

> If I were Apple I'd come up with a name unique to the Chinese market.

Apple has done this for their lesser product. AirPort is released as AirMac in Japan, for example.

jcampbell12• 15 years ago

In China, all laws can be trumped by what is good for the people. It is written in their constitution. Since Apple provides something like 1M jobs in China, it is unlikely a court ruling would be enforced. This problem will go away with one phone call.

ugh2• 15 years ago

“Their copyright infringement is very clear.”

Wrong translation, wrong statement or different laws?

Other than that: Boring.

PakG15• 15 years ago

When I read the article, it actually seems a bit complicated and not so cut and dry.

If foreign companies want to enter China, they need to obey Chinese law, especially when those laws aren't malicious, make sense, and are enforced correctly, even if the result is ludicrous. Any country should expect the same when a foreign company comes to compete within their shores. And in this particular case, it doesn't seem ludicrous.

Here's a ludicrous example, a close cousin to domain name squatting:

http://www.chinahearsay.com/coca-cola-plays-it-smart-in-its-...

What Apple has going for it here is the fact that it has Foxconn as a key manufacturing partner, which is a huge employer in China. That may give it some political power. Who knows. In the end, $1.6b is chump change for Apple, and it may be worth it for them to just settle.

pjin2• 15 years ago

  What Apple has going for it here is the fact that it has
  Foxconn as a key manufacturing partner, which is a huge
  employer in China. That may give it some political power.

Foxconn is a Taiwanese company. That doesn't count as "political power" in China.

nitrogen• 15 years ago

Here's a ludicrous example, a close cousin to domain name squatting:

http://www.chinahearsay.com/coca-cola-plays-it-smart-in-its-...

It would be more useful if other bottles were included in the comparison. It doesn't matter if two brands of water bottle look alike, if all the other water bottles not pictured also look that way.

redthrowaway2• 15 years ago

The article's pretty clear. Proview registered the iPad trademark in 2001, Apple licensed it for use outside of China in 2009, but then went on to use the trademark in mainland China without signing a licensing agreement.

That's copyright infringement, plain and simple.

ugh2• 15 years ago

That sounds a lot like trademark infringement, not copyright infringement.

zephjc• 15 years ago

I'm sure whoever decided this got a nice kickback.

xedarius• 15 years ago

iPad is a strong brand, and I can't see Apple selling it as anything else. However it is not worth $1.6b. If the company holding the copyright wasn't about to go to the dogs I'd be more concerned. Apple can enter into a lengthy legal wrangle and wait for the company in question to fold.

philhippus• 15 years ago

Even if the company folds, the name 'iPad' had already been registered before Apple decided to use it, and the more 'iPad's' Apple sells in China, the more they will have to pay up eventually.

Angostura• 15 years ago

Trade mark, not copyright.

ChrisArchitect• 15 years ago

So I can't get a real iPad from a fake Apple store in China? I guess Apple will have to open some more real stores and sell renamed 'fake' iPads under another name. haha

pi18n• 15 years ago

Although I don't know if it's fair to tar them all with the same brush, I find it ironic that a Chinese company would cry foul on trademarks.

dasil0032• 15 years ago

It's just a desperate company approaching bankruptcy doing what they can to stay alive.

valnour• 15 years ago

They may be a desperate company approaching bankruptcy, but they did own the trademark for the name long before Apple wanted to use it.

est• 15 years ago

QFT

> Proview Technology (Shenzhen) is a subsidiary of Hong Kong-headquartered Proview International Holdings Limited, which also has a branch in Taipei.

shimon_e2• 15 years ago

Wow $1.6 billion. I remember a case in China few years ago when a peasant found a 3cm bug in a bottle of Sprite. He sued Coca-Cola for 4 rmb ($0.64). The court ruled in his favor but only awarded him 2.05 rmb.

I wonder if this is a change in heart in how much the Chinese courts will be awarding in future cases.

PakG15• 15 years ago

That's like comparing an ant and an elephant.... how does it even compare? One is a bottle of Sprite, and not even a class action lawsuit, the other is a trademark for selling rights in the entire country.

shimon_e2• 15 years ago

I was making a point that Chinese courts generally don't award large lawsuits. The peasant sued for 4 rmb but the court felt that was too much. Here is the news article if you are interested: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2010-02/04/content_942...

Here is another case dealing with trademarks where the Chinese courts awarded nickels on dimes.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2006/01/11/afx2444090.html

PakG15• 15 years ago

I used to own a Proview CRT monitor back in the day. My, my, how things have changed.

mdonahoe• 15 years ago

What does the word "iPad" look like in Chinese?

jcampbell12• 15 years ago

Apple doesn't use Chinese characters in their Chinese branding, so it looks like "iPad". Also chinese has adopted quite a bit of English these days, for instance a music player is an MP3, and a portable video player like and iPod touch is an MP4. The M and P are pronounced like English, and the number is spoken in chinese. Interestingly, "Apple" is almost always written and spoken in Chinese: 苹果 - ping guo - which has the same meaning as the English.

mikhailt• 15 years ago

We don't really have the whole story here.

If you read the news story here from China: http://topics.scmp.com/news/china-business-watch/article/App...

> The Hong Kong court found that Apple and IP Application, while drawing up the agreement for that sale, discovered the two mainland iPad trademarks were not owned by Taipei-based Proview Electronics as they were led to believe, but by Proview Technology.

> Apple said the defendants, while acknowledging the mistake, refused to rectify the matter and asked Apple to pay US$10 million for the two trademarks. Apple and IP began their action against the Proview group on May 20 last year.

All of this points that Apple didn't exactly do this intentionally.

Apple can't call an iPad an iPad in China, says court.

Related Stories