browse 28 times : February 11, 2012 3:50 p.m.
|the day before
industry has been concerned Apple sued Proview cable the iPad trademark case of First Instance lost, if the judgment comes into force, the Apple Mainland will lose the “iPad” trademark. This means that, once the judgment entered into force, the Apple iPad or renamed in the Mainland, or pay a trademark license fee to the only crown price.
the cause of
the trademark dispute dates back to 2000. From the beginning with the year, Proview Proview’s Taipei in , countries and regions were registered iPad trademark, 2001, Proview International’s Proview Technology ( Shenzhen, ) (hereinafter referred to as “Shenzhen Proview”), two categories of the iPad trademark registered in Mainland China. At that time, Apple did not launch the iPad tablet computer products.
2010, Apple introduced the Tablet PC iPad personalized. IPad to enter mainland China, a war on the iPad the mainland of China trademark attribution lit – “apple” in Shenzhen, Shenzhen Proview to court. Plaintiff of the suit is “Apple” and the United Kingdom IP application Development Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the “British IP Company”), they request the Court to order registration No. 1,530,557 “iPad”, registration number 1.68231 million “iPad” trademark the exclusive right to iPad Chinese Mainland trademark, Shenzhen Proview “At the same time compensate the trademark ownership survey fees, legal fees, loss of 4 million yuan.
Shenzhen City Intermediate People’s Court accepted on April 19, 2010, and February 23, 2011 August 21, October 18 three hearing the case.
court held that, obtain another person’s trademark “Apple” side business, should bear a higher duty of care, and entered into a trademark transfer contract shall, in accordance with our law, and trademark rights, and apply the necessary transfer of trademark formalities. Department of trademark transfer contract in this case another plaintiff United Kingdom IP Proview Electronics Co., Ltd. (Taipei Proview company) signed and Shenzhen Proview between the “apparent agency” (“apparent agency” means the act of Although there is no power of attorney, but because of my behavior, resulting in enough to make a bona fide third parties to believe that the appearance of a power of attorney, with the bona fide third parties, and I bear the legal consequences of agency behavior) not established. Therefore, the “Apple” claims of the parties to the lack of factual and legal basis should be rejected. The hospital was made the first instance verdict: All rejected Apple’s claim, case acceptance fee 45,600 yuan by the “Apple” party commitment.
At present, the reporter has not yet been official news of Apple’s appeal on the case.
Disclaimer statement: This article represents only the personal point of view, and Wenhui network. Content and originality of the paper statements without the site confirmed that on which all or part of the contents of the authenticity of the text, completeness, timeliness, this site does not make any warranties or undertakings, the reader is for reference only, please verify contents.
the rule of law,