Feeds

Apple slams hard-up Proview for conning the courts

Fruity missive claims ailing monitor biz misled customers

Build a business case: developing custom apps

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. ®

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
So, Apple won't sell cheap kit? Prepare the iOS garden wall WRECKING BALL
It can throw the low cost race if it looks to the cloud
End of buttons? Apple looks to patent animating iPhone sidewalls
Filing suggests handset with display strips
One step closer to ROBOT BUTLERS: Dyson flashes vid of VACUUM SUCKER bot
Latest cleaner available for world+dog in September
Samsung Gear S: Quick, LAUNCH IT – before Apple straps on iWatch
Full specs for wrist-mounted device here ... but who'll buy it?
Apple promises to lift Curse of the Drained iPhone 5 Battery
Have you tried turning it off and...? Never mind, here's a replacement
Now that's FIRE WIRE: HP recalls 6 MILLION burn-risk laptop cables
Right in the middle of Burning Mains Man week
Apple's iWatch? They cannae do it ... they don't have the POWER
Analyst predicts fanbois will have to wait until next year
Tim Cook in Applerexia fears: New MacBook THINNER THAN EVER
'Supply chain sources' give up the goss on new iLappy
Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
Tip: Put the shades on and you'll look less of a spanner
prev story

Whitepapers

Top 10 endpoint backup mistakes
Avoid the ten endpoint backup mistakes to ensure that your critical corporate data is protected and end user productivity is improved.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Backing up distributed data
Eliminating the redundant use of bandwidth and storage capacity and application consolidation in the modern data center.
The essential guide to IT transformation
ServiceNow discusses three IT transformations that can help CIOs automate IT services to transform IT and the enterprise
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.