On August 22, 2012, Shenzhen Proview sued Apple's subsidiary, Apple Trading (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., for a lawsuit in Shanghai Pudong New District Court. This is the latest in a series of IPAD China trademark disputes between Apple and Proview.

On February 13, 2012, the US company's stock price broke through $500 and the total market value of $466.3 billion exceeded the combined market value of Google and Microsoft. However, this technology giant recently fell into a IPAD China trademark right.

This is not the first time that Apple has encountered trademark disputes. Apple has launched a series of innovative products such as the iMac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad since the "i decade" started in 2000. The number of trademark crashes that it encounters is not small, but it is almost always a matter of reconciliation or purchase of trademark rights. .

But this time, Proview Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. has dragged Apple into a dispute over several years of IPAD China trademark dispute. The reason why this fight is long-lasting is that Apple is reluctant to repay the trademark rights it has already bought, and Shenzhen Proview is reluctant to recognize the previous transfer transaction and insists that it is the owner of IPAD China's trademark rights. By.

Who's IPAD

After Shenzhen Proview successively sued Apple distributors for infringement in many places in China, Apple issued a statement on the technology blog site All ThingsD on February 17, 2012: “We purchased Proview's IPAD trademarks in 10 countries several years ago. Global use rights, but Proview refused to perform the agreement with Apple."

This statement explains why Apple and Proview could not reach a settlement on the IPAD China trademark rights negotiations, and went so far as to go to court.

The Southern Weekend reporter obtained several indictments and verdicts from Shenzhen Proview lawyers Ma Dongxiao and Xie Xianghui on the IPAD dispute series. These materials generally reveal the IPAD trademark transfer route.

In August 2009, a British company called IPADL (IP company), whose employee Jonathan found Timothy Lo, a staff of Proview UK, expressed that he hoped to purchase all the IPAD trademarks owned by Proview.

Timothy Lo told Jonathan: "We have trademarks for IPAD in EU member states and in the following countries: Vietnam, Mexico, Thailand, South Korea, Indonesia, Singapore and China."

Jonathan said he hopes to purchase all Proview-owned IPAD trademarks for 20,000 pounds. Timothy Lo replied: "This matter has reached a stage where you need to communicate directly with our Chinese colleagues. My colleague's name is Mai Shihong, who is responsible for our Legal Department. This e-mail was also copied to him. From now on, please direct your communication."

On October 22nd, 2009, a person named “Hui Yuan” sent an email to Jonathan with Shenzhen Proview’s mailbox system, claiming that he was a member of the Proview Legal Department and asked to continue the negotiation and expressed willingness to accept £35,000. Quote.

On December 1, 2009, IP company sent all the IPAD trademarks, including two registered trademarks of Shenzhen Proview (IPAD China Trademarks), to Proview, and Hui Yuan confirmed that "The attachment is a copy of all the certificates of registered countries. "At the same time, said that the money should be called to Taiwan Proview.

In the same month, Taiwan Proview issued a power of attorney, agreeing and authorizing Mai Shihong to sign a trademark transfer agreement. The power of attorney includes the seal of Proview International Chairman and CEO Yang Rongshan and the seal of Taiwan Proview, but only Mai Shihong’s signature.

On December 23, Taiwan Proview signed an agreement with IP. The signatories of the agreement are Mai Shihong and a director of IP Corporation. On the same day, the two also signed the "China Trademark Transfer Agreement" on behalf of Taiwan Proview and IP respectively, and agreed that Taiwan Proview shall transfer the IPAD trademark registered by Shenzhen Proview to IP for a price of 1 pound.

According to Yang Rongshan's statement in a press conference held in Beijing on February 17, 2012, Proview was informed by the IP company that because IPADL and IPAD were similar, they wanted to purchase the IPAD trademark. The company has just been established for seven days and has not decided what products to do. In the future, it can guarantee that it will not compete with the only product.

2009 was exactly the year when Proview’s financial crisis broke out. The entire company’s strategy was to shrink overseas. Proview had almost 20 factories and offices overseas.

"At that time, Mr. Mak told me that a company had to buy the trademark of our IPAD. I asked which company registered the trademark. The other party said that it was registered by Taipei Proview. At that time, I asked Taipei Proview. Whether the trademark was intended to continue to be held, Taipei Proview was contracting at that time.” Yang Rongshan said that the other party’s bid was 20,000 pounds. When a colleague came to ask him, he was taken out and said that even the registration fee does not only cover this cost. .

Yang Rongshan said that later IP company wrote an email to the effect that 20,000 is a suitable price, if Proview requires more, IP company will use legal means to revoke Proview's IPAD trademark. At the time, Proview trademarks had not been used in the UK for many years.

In 2003, when Proview blocked Apple's registration of the iPod trademark, it took a lot of money. Yang Rongshan said that Proview was afraid to make such a thing.

However, Shenzhen Proview Attorney Ma Dongxiao told the Southern Weekend reporter that Yang Rongshan claimed to know that he had sold the IPAD trademark held by Taiwan Proview (except for the rest of China), but he did not know that he sold the IPAD China trademark registered by Shenzhen Proview. And Yang Rongshan did not see the contract of transfer and did not sign it. In addition, Mai Shihong now seems to have failed to find it. The business card used by Mai Shihong during the transaction was written by the general manager of the Shenzhen Law Bo Zhiquan Patent & Trademark Law Office.

On February 22nd, 2012, the Southern Weekend reporter contacted Ms. Huang Yuna, Apple's China Public Relations Department. She said that Apple’s current public response is its previous statement and lawyer letter. Two days ago, King & Wood Mallesons first sent an attorney letter to Proview founder Yang Rongshan as an Apple agent. Apple said that “Shenzhen Proview did not know anything about trademark transfer” and other statements were inaccurate. Shenzhen Weiguan took part in IPAD. Chinese trademark transfer.

Difficult fight on January 27, 2010, Apple officially launched the IPAD tablet at the press conference, IP company has repeatedly asked Mai Shihong to complete the transfer process of Shenzhen Proview registered IPAD trademark, namely the trademark in China. The transfer procedures in the mainland have not yet been achieved.

The information obtained by the Southern Weekend reporter from the Shenzhen Proview Lawyer Group indicated that in February 2010, IP company and Apple signed a rights transfer agreement, and Apple received an IPAD brand bought by IP company for £10.

On April 3, 2010, IPAD products began selling to the public in the United States. Apple sold IPAD in China on September 16, 2010. The time difference between these six months is the negotiation time Apple left for the Chinese market.

As the coordinator of Proview's restructuring work and Shenzhen Public Crown's IPAD trademark disputes public relations officer who was invited by Shenzhen Proview, Li Jun, the CEO of Hejun Venture, revealed to the Southern Weekend reporter that in 2010, after 8 banks sealed up Shenzhen Proview, Apple also sent The lawyer coordinated transfer of trademarks with 8 banks. At that time, Apple’s lawyers went to eight banks to negotiate, and even had a $10 million offer. At that time, Apple requested that it not be transferred during the negotiations.

However, the expectations of the two sides differ greatly. Unlike the i-phone trademark applied by Hanwang, the IPAD application of Proview Technology is identical to Apple's IPAD alphabet. The 3.65 million U.S. dollars that Hanwang sells from i-phone is equivalent to one-tenth of Hanwang's listed capital.

Li Su said that the creditor’s maximum compensation for compensation price is expected to be 400 million U.S. dollars. This money can almost make up for a complete Proview funding hole.

For a long time unsuccessful talks, it was Apple that initiated the lawsuit. On May 20, 2010, Apple and IP Corporation sued Proview, Taiwan Proview, Shenzhen Proview, and Yang Rongshan to the Hong Kong High Court. The "Legal Opinion" issued by Colin Andrew Shipp of Hong Kong believes that IP company has made a valid and enforceable contract for the sale of the IPAD China trademark.

Shortly afterwards in June 2010, Apple and IP filed a lawsuit against Shenzhen Weiguan in the Shenzhen Intermediate Court, requesting confirmation of Apple’s ownership of Shenzhen Weiguan’s IPAD trademark rights. However, on December 5, 2011, Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court made a judgment of losing the apple. Apple refused to accept the appeal and continued to appeal to the Guangdong Higher Court. The second instance will be held on February 29, 2012.

When the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court held its last hearing, Ma Dongxiao, an attorney with Shenzhen Proview, went to mediation with a Hong Kong lawyer invited by Apple and was told that Apple was willing to settle for several million yuan.

According to Li Su, Proview International’s eight creditor banks met on November 1st, 2010 to discuss Proview International’s request to Apple for “infringement fees” related to the IPAD China trademark.

The first action taken by Shenzhen Proview was to file a complaint with the Trade and Industry Bureau of Xicheng District in Beijing in March 2011. Before the trademark was transferred, Shenzhen Proview was the IPAD trademark owner and Apple sold the product infringing on the Chinese mainland. In June 2011, the Xicheng Branch of the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Industry and Commerce made a hearing to be punished, setting off a planned penalty of RMB24,839.39 million. Once the money is collected, it will be placed in the treasury.

Apple began negotiating with Shenzhen Proview, and the Industrial and Commercial Bureau suspended the implementation of the penalty decision. Since then, Shenzhen Proview has filed a lawsuit in Shenzhen Futian District Court and Guangzhou and Huizhou Intermediate People's Court against IPAD's sales agents Gome and Shundian, requesting them to stop selling the IPAD.

According to Ma Dongxiao, Apple's lawsuit against Shenzhen Proview in Hong Kong has not yet begun. He is currently in the stage of exchanging evidence, asking experts, witnesses and exchanging testimony. It is expected that a court meeting will be held in Hong Kong in March this year to discuss the opening hours.

The struggle between this lawsuit and anti-litigation may be beyond Apple's imagination. Some of Apple's previous products have also encountered trademark disputes, but most of them ended with Apple's victory. For example, Cisco launched a product called iPhone earlier than Apple and caused disputes. However, the two parties finally reached a settlement in 2007 to share this trademark.

According to the records of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Fujitsu has transferred all rights to the name of the iPad to Apple on March 17, 2010.

In several lawsuits initiated by Apple’s opponent Shenzhen Proview, none of the listed defendants were Apple Inc. but their branches and distributors in China. Moreover, Shenzhen Proview did not claim infringement claims. If you want to claim, it will be astronomical. If Apple loses, in accordance with the "Regulations of the People's Republic of China on the Implementation of the Trademark Law," the act of infringing the exclusive right to use a registered trademark shall be a fine not more than three times the amount of the illegal business. Many domestic media have calculated that the maximum fine will reach 30 billion yuan.

"Without suing Apple's headquarters, there are only considerations for leaving room for negotiation, and there are also technical reasons for us as lawyers. There is no time limit for foreign-related lawsuits, and the time for trials is very long. The more things get dragged, the easier it becomes and the more room for maneuver becomes. Not much.” Ma Dongxiao, an attorney with Shenzhen Proview, told the Southern Weekend reporter.

Obviously, the purpose of Shenzhen Proview's prosecution is simply to force Apple back to the negotiating table of trademark transfer. Because the bankruptcy company on the verge of bankruptcy of the 8 domestic banks urging debt repayment, and behind the collapse of the Champion Group, the IPAD trademark in hand is already the most valuable asset.

Before this trademark war was launched, not many people knew that Shenzhen Proview was once a company that produced displays. Its parent company, Proview, was founded in Taipei in 1989. In 1997, it was listed in Hong Kong under the name of Proview International. Taiwan businessman Yang Rongshan was the chairman and chief executive officer of Proview International.

Proview Group has subsidiaries in mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, the United States, Brazil, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Among them, Taiwan Proview and Shenzhen Proview both belong to Proview International and its legal representative is Yang Rongshan.

Yang Rongshan held a press conference in Beijing on February 17. In the second half of 1998, Proview invested 30 million U.S. dollars and began to design iFamily family series, including IPAD equipment. The first generation of IPAD produced by Proview uses a CRT cathode ray tube. Although it is not a flat panel display, it can still be touched. This network device named "IPAD" is considered "If it only needs Internet access, this is the most suitable product," and the ex-factory price is about $300 per unit.

At the time, Proview iIPAD was sold to the United Kingdom, Mexico, and Brazil. However, due to the use of the CRT, it is easy to cause misoperation in the touch screen in a relatively dry area, so the IPAD disappeared in the market shortly after the flash.

In 2000, Proview Electronics Co., Ltd. (Taiwan Proview), which belongs to Proview Group, and Shenzhen Proview, have registered IPAD trademarks in various countries and regions. In the second year, Shenzhen Proview submitted two types of IPAD trademark applications to the China Trademark Office, and both were registered.

The first conflict between Proview and Apple occurred in 2003. That year, Apple went to Europe to register the trademark of the iPod Walkman, and it was only for the sake of preventing Apple from registering with the IPAD trademark. After three years of litigation, Proview spent a huge sum of money and eventually gave up blocking.

Since then, Proview has collaborated with Motorola on IPAD products. From 2003 to 2008, Proview's corporate strategy has been laid out around the "iFamily" and gradually became one of the world's top five monitor manufacturers.

However, the sudden financial crisis in 2008 made Proview's largest customer, the Polaroid of the United States, bankrupt. As a result, the receivables were not recovered and the funds had problems. At the time, Proview hoped to use the IPAD trademark to start a strategic transformation and re-enter the small notebook and tablet market. But Proview did not have the support of capital flow at this time. Yang Rongshan recalled that in 2008, Proview owed banks and suppliers a total of 2 billion yuan.

The troubled Proview was subsequently suspended from trading on August 2, 2010 and reported to be trading at HK$0.202 before the suspension. According to the announcement at the time of the suspension of Proview International, Proview’s net current liabilities amounted to 2.87 billion yuan, and the loans of 3.8 billion yuan were overdue, while the liabilities to eight major banks such as Bank of China were approximately 180 million US dollars.