The company believes that in 2009 Apple’s lawyers created IPADL firm solely to obtain the iPad trademark rights without disclosing its link to Apple. Furthermore, one of IPADL’s representatives communicating with Proview via e-mail, Graham Robinson, is believed to have used a fake name, introducing himself as Jonathan Hargreaves. Mr Robinson currently works for a UK company specialising in intellectual property issues but it declined to issue any comments.
According to the case filings IPADL misrepresented why they needed the trademark assuring Proview that it will not use the trademark to compete with the Chinese firm. It is now seeking up to ¥10bn (£1bn) in compensation as well as requests to void the 2009 deal in which it sold the rights to the trademark for $55,000. A month after the trademark deal Apple launched the iPad. Apple in turn accused Proview of failing to honour the agreement in China. Hong Kong court has ruled in favour of Apple in this matter. The Shanghai district court also rejected Proview's demands for Apple to stop selling the iPad.
Proview, which has filed for bankruptcy, is still counting on making a comeback after solving all problems with their competitors. It mainly relies on the outcome of the ongoing dispute with Apple. Despite the unfavourable rulings in Hong Kong and Shanghai the case is still to be heard in the higher court in Guangdong, southern Chinese province.
The dispute between Apple, the technological giant, and Proview, a company on the verge of collapsing, shows how unstable and uncertain technological industry is. Trademark battles can make or break a business.
Also see: Patent disputes: protecting manufacturers or threatening innovation? | Apple forced to disable push email service in Germany | | Samsung and the patent abuse
No comments:
Post a Comment