bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

sponsorType

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

Bien Perez

Apple's legal fight over the 'iPad' trademark is heating up, as a Taiwanese electronics company's lawsuit in the United States seeks to reclaim its international ownership of that brand from the technology giant.
In an amended complaint filed yesterday at the Superior Court of California in Santa Clara County,  Taipei-based Proview Electronics accused Apple and its agents of fraud and unfair competition  when its iPad trademarks were bought on December 2009. It  asked the court to nullify that acquisition.
'Once the agreement is voided for fraud, the iPad trademarks in the European Union, South Korea, Mexico, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam will revert back to Proview Taiwan,' the firm said in a statement.  
It added that legal questions and remedies in the US lawsuit and in the dispute over the mainland iPad trademarks between Proview Technology (Shenzhen) and Apple 'are separate and distinct, and have no bearing on one another'.  
Proview Shenzhen had earlier estimated that compensation for use of the two iPad trademarks on the mainland  would cost Apple up to US$2 billion.
The stakes in the US lawsuit could be higher for Apple because the iPad trademarks sought by Proview Taiwan cover more markets.
Both Proview Taiwan and Proview Shenzhen are subsidiaries of Hong Kong-listed Proview International,  a maker of computer displays that  has ceased most of its operations due to unpaid debts. The company, founded by bankrupt Taiwanese businessman Rowell Yang Long-san,  is targeted for delisting by the Hong Kong stock exchange and has had its stock suspended from trading since August 2, 2010.  
Carolyn Wu, Apple's spokeswoman in Beijing, declined to comment on Proview's litigation in the US. She  said that Apple  had acquired worldwide rights to the iPad trademark and that 'a Hong Kong court has sided with Apple in this matter'.  
The US complaint alleged that 'Apple was predisposed to use deception to obtain the trademarks from Proview Taiwan' based on prior dealings with the company and because the iPhone maker 'was pressed for time' to acquire the trademarks ahead of the launch of its iPad media tablet on January 27, 2010. 
The Proview group, which had registered its trademarks for 'I-PAD', 'IPAD' and 'i-PAD' between 2001 and 2003, had initially tangled with Apple when it opposed the US firm's filing of a trademark in the European Union for the iPod music player in 2005. Proview said it later withdrew that opposition after Apple threatened legal action.  
The amended complaint filed by Proview Taiwan alleged that Apple used an intermediary, Farncombe International,  and its managing director, Graham Robinson,  'to create an elaborate but false pretext for the purchase of Proview's IPAD trademarks'. Robinson was also accused of adopting a false name, 'Jonathan Hargreaves', when he represented British firm IP Application Development during negotiations with Proview.  
The amended complaint alleged that Robinson evaded direct questions from Proview as to the nature of his business. Proview cited e-mail correspondence between its Taiwan unit and Hargreaves, in which Hargreaves had  said that IP Application Development was a newly formed company that 'will not compete with Proview'. He also said in an e-mail that the company wanted the 'IPAD' trademark because it was an abbreviation of its name. 
Their negotiations culminated in the transfer of all iPad trademarks held by Proview Taiwan, including two registered on the mainland, for GBP35,000 (HK$435,000) to IP Application Development on December 23, 2009. The Proview group said it later discovered that IP Application Development was a special-purpose company established by Apple to acquire trademarks to the iPad brand.
Cal Kenney, a spokesman for  Proview Taiwan, said that 'even  careful diligence is ineffective  when the counter-party is engaging in intentional fraud'.  
Stan Abrams, a Beijing-based intellectual property lawyer and professor, said fraud would be hard to prove just based on 'a line in an e-mail about a promised non-compete [arrangement]'. Abrams asked: 'Why wasn't a non-compete [clause] written into the contract?
'The contract clearly represents the fulfilment of the parties' intentions and it supersedes everything else, including that e-mail [cited by Proview],' Abrams said.
$1.8b
Bank debt, in Hong Kong dollars, Proview International reported in its last published results in March 2010



Is Europe, the world’s geopolitical punching bag, ready to hit back at the US and China?

China’s Honor debuts robot phone and humanoid companion in push into AI hardware

China’s Xiaomi launches premium smartphone 17 series globally to challenge Apple, Samsung

Huawei targets global comeback with Mate 80 Pro smartphone, new smartwatch

Apple

iPad lawsuit raises the stakes for Apple