Feeds

Apple slams hard-up Proview for conning the courts

Fruity missive claims ailing monitor biz misled customers

The Power of One Brief: Top reasons to choose HP BladeSystem

Apple has decided to up the ante on trademark dispute foe and failed Asian monitor vendor Proview, accusing the firm of misleading the courts and of trying to milk the iPad maker for more money in order to pay off its creditors.

The two have been locked in a long running legal battle over who owns the IPAD trademark in China.

Apple says it bought the rights fair and square from Proview’s Taiwan entity Proview Electronics while Proview argues that only its Shenzhen affiliate Proview Technology has the right to sell the IPAD trademark for use in China.

They are currently awaiting the outcome of Apple’s appeal against a December 2011 judgement in Proview’s favour, although the judges in the case have already asked both parties to settle out of court.

Having repeated the same mantra for weeks that Proview is not honouring the original agreement and that a court in Hong Kong has sided with it on the matter, Apple decided to turn up the heat a little.

We've asked Apple for confirmation of the widely reported statement, but in the meantime here's what they sent to AP.

Proview is misleading Chinese courts and customers with claims that the iPad trademarks cannot be transferred, or that mistakes were made in handling the transaction. We respect Chinese laws and regulations, and as a company that generates a lot of intellectual property we would never knowingly abuse someone else’s trademarks.

It goes on to say that despite approaching Proview Shenzhen through a third party in 2009 for access to the trademarks, it was directed to Proview Taiwan because the ailing Shenzhen affiliate didn’t want to be forced to pay its creditors.

“Proview didn’t want to pay its debts in 2009 when it sold the iPad trademarks, and because they still owe a lot of people a lot of money, they are now unfairly trying to get more from Apple for a trademark we already paid for,” the statement continued.

Proview has since hit back, telling AP that it is Apple who is misleading the courts and that it doesn’t make sense for it to have forced Apple to sign with Proview Taiwan as the amount it received for the trademark - £35,000 – was so small anyway.

Apple’s arguments certainly make sense, given that Proview’s Shenzhen affiliate is basically a shell of a company with a headquarters in disrepair and various reports emerged last week stating that one of its creditors is seeking to have the company liquidated, claiming it owes over $8m in debts.

However, Apple has also been portrayed in recent weeks in a less than favourable light. Proview went on the offensive at the end of February by filing in a US court arguing that the fondleslab maker used deception and fraud to trick Proview into selling it the IPAD patents back in 2009.

The only certain winners in this case at the moment are the lawyers representing both sides. ®

Using blade systems to cut costs and sharpen efficiencies

More from The Register

next story
Report: American tech firms charge Britons a thumping nationality tax
Without representation, too. Time for a Boston (Lincs) Macbook Party?
iPad? More like iFAD: We reveal why Apple ran off to IBM
But never fear fanbois, you're still lapping up iPhones, Macs
Apple gets patent for WRIST-PUTER: iTime for a smartwatch
It does everything a smartwatch should do ... but Apple owns it
Apple orders huge MOUNTAIN of 80 MILLION 'Air' iPhone 6s
Bigger, harder trouser bulges foretold for fanbois
Child diagnosed as allergic to iPad
Apple's fondleslab is the tablet dermatitis sufferers won't want to take
Microsoft takes on Chromebook with low-cost Windows laptops
Redmond's chief salesman: We're taking 'hard' decisions
For Lenovo US, 8-inch Windows tablets are DEAD – long live 8-inch Windows tablets
Reports it's killing off smaller slabs are greatly exaggerated
prev story

Whitepapers

Seven Steps to Software Security
Seven practical steps you can begin to take today to secure your applications and prevent the damages a successful cyber-attack can cause.
Consolidation: The Foundation for IT Business Transformation
In this whitepaper learn how effective consolidation of IT and business resources can enable multiple, meaningful business benefits.
Designing a Defense for Mobile Applications
Learn about the various considerations for defending mobile applications - from the application architecture itself to the myriad testing technologies.
Build a business case: developing custom apps
Learn how to maximize the value of custom applications by accelerating and simplifying their development.
Consolidation: the foundation for IT and business transformation
In this whitepaper learn how effective consolidation of IT and business resources can enable multiple, meaningful business benefits.