The battle between Apple (News - Alert) and Proview Electronics is heating up. The companies have locked horns over the issue of the iPad brand name over the past few months and in the latest development, Apple has called the actions of Proview Electronics unfair.
For the uninitiated, Proview and Apple are sparring in courts in China, as the Chinese manufacturer wants to put a ban on iPad sales exports.
According to Apple, the battle is “misleading Chinese courts and customers” and that Apple was tricked into signing a 2009 agreement that raises unnecessary issues of ownership of the Chinese trademarks.
Apple spokeswoman Carolyn Wu said in an official statement, “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.”
She added, “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.”
Proview lawyer Xie Xianghui counterattacks and accuses Apple of seeking to “mislead the courts, the public and media.”
However, according to Apple, Proview’s agenda is clear, as they just want to cash into the iPad popularity and make money at Apple’s expense.
“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.”
But Xianghui dismisses this claim and says, “It does not make sense for Proview to ask Apple to sign with Proview Taiwan to avoid paying this small amount of money to the creditors.”
“The fact is that Apple's former lawyer made a silly mistake,” Xiao added. “Proview still thinks both sides can solve the dispute by peaceful talks.”
Interestingly, Proview wants to settle the legal issue out of court, something that Apple isn’t agreeing to. A ruling is still pending from a court in southern China's Guangdong province over Apple's appeal of a ruling against it in the city of Shenzhen.
Edited by Jennifer Russell