/article-new/2012/02/proview_logo-150x49.jpg?lossy){kind=logo}
Reuters reports that a Shanghai court has declined to issue an injunction that would have barred sales of Apple's iPad in the city, a ruling that is part of the dispute between Apple and Proview Technology over the trademark on the iPad name.
Early reports had painted the decision as a significant victory for Apple, but while the company is no doubt pleased that the judge in the case did not find sufficient cause to halt iPad sales at this time, it appears to mainly be a procedural ruling to put off further proceedings until a decision is reached in a related case in Guangdong province. Apple lost an initial case there and is currently appealing that decision.
The Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Court denied a request by Proview Technology (Shenzhen) for the injunction and agreed to Apple's request that the trademark infringement case be suspended pending a ruling in a separate case in a higher court.
The decision, announced on Thursday on the court's website, gives Apple some leeway in a larger battle over the iPad trademark in China, which is important to Apple not only as a consumer market, but also because the country is a major production base for the iPad and other of its products.
Proview has won several small victories against Apple in cities around China, but a ruling against Apple in Shanghai would have been by far the most significant given the city's size and Apple's presence there with three of its own retail stores.
Top Rated Comments
But this one doesn't appear to be legit. Proview appears to have seller's remorse on the original deal when they sold the trademark and having severe financial problems, simply sees a big payday. Personally, I'd bet that if Apple offered them $1 million to settle, they'd take it...maybe even less, but that would set a bad precedent for Apple and make them a target for other lawsuits.
Just to be clear; here is a quick summary of what transpired.
1. Dec 2009 : B&M (Apple's Shell) buys iPad trademark from Proview.Taiwan from Chairman Mr. Yang (who is also Chairman of Proview.China, and YOKE). The trademark is for Taiwan, HongKong and China. (VERY clearly defined).
2. Jan 2010 : Apple announces iPad
3. Feb 2010 : Proview.China claims they never sold the Trademark (Proview.Taiwan had no rights to sell it -- Although Mr. Yang their Chairman signed off the papers). Now demand $10,000,000 from Apple.
4. March 2010 : Apples says, no, we purchased it clearly.
5. April 2010 : Proview.China files bankruptcy.
6. Apple has been fighting since then to get the trademark they paid for.
These guys are ridiculous. Trying to get paid for something they had nothing to do with because of a trademark. Maybe they should go and actually produce a worthwhile product to make money...like a normal business.
There's nothing wrong with a trademark lawsuit when they're legit. And Apple has seemed a bit arrogant in this space. Just because Apple is large and everyone wants an iPad doesn't necessarily make them right.
But this one doesn't appear to be legit. Proview appears to have seller's remorse on the original deal when they sold the trademark and having severe financial problems, simply sees a big payday. Personally, I'd bet that if Apple offered them $1 million to settle, they'd take it...maybe even less, but that would set a bad precedent for Apple and make them a target for other lawsuits.
Sweep these ridiculous small fry out of Apple's way already. People want iPads, tyvm. There was even an admission by the gov't or another body earlier that a sales ban on iPads would not play well with the public.
Far too many tech companies are waging patent and trademark wars rather than actually creating good products.
And here we have Proview. If they actually had a product that had world-wide recognition, or even decent market penetration in their home territory, then they would have a point. But no. Instead they are trying to get rich by playing legal games instead. I saw a poster on here of a supposed Proview product, but it looked like it had been released in the 80's and not something any sane person would ever buy. Did it ever actually exist?
Organisations like Proview who appear to be just looking for a free ride need to have their asses kicked by the courts as they add nothing to society. By the same token we need to stop organisations hoarding patents just because they can, and then suing anyone who has an idea that is remotely similar even though they had no intention/inclination to bring the stuff to market. Patents have a place in the development process, but they should also have a fairly short shelf life.