Apple declared the first sentence is: "Years ago, we purchased a Proview iPad trademark in different countries of the world's ten". The remark is not false. As early as 2009, Apple in order to obtain the iPad trademark ownership, specifically established in the UK IP company, £ 35,000 from Taipei Proview subdivisions purchased iPad trademark ownership.
The problem is, Proview Taipei and Shenzhen Proview with Proview International, a subsidiary, but the brothers out afterwards
The problem is, Proview Taipei and Shenzhen Proview with Proview International, a subsidiary, but the brothers out afterwards
iPad trademark registered in mainland China in Shenzhen Proview. The data show that in 2001, Shenzhen Proview company
registered in mainland China iPad trademark, Apple did not launch the iPad product. buy cheap cellphone accessories
As a result, the lawsuit as a result. In 2010, Apple sued Proview Shenzhen, the court held that the trademark ownership of,
As a result, the lawsuit as a result. In 2010, Apple sued Proview Shenzhen, the court held that the trademark ownership of,
because Apple considers the Proview International has the iPad for sale in the Chinese trademark to Apple, but Proview
Shenzhen mainland China the right to use the Proview Shenzhen , Taipei Proview is not entitled to sell.
December 2011, the iPad trademark of Apple and Proview Shenzhen contention case, Apple first instance loses, Apple choose to
December 2011, the iPad trademark of Apple and Proview Shenzhen contention case, Apple first instance loses, Apple choose to
appeal. mobile phone covers
It is understood that the second instance will begin on February 29. However, Southeast University School of Law Professor
It is understood that the second instance will begin on February 29. However, Southeast University School of Law Professor
Zhang Marin's view, if Apple can not provide more favorable evidence is not likely the second instance commuted. "On the one
hand taking into account the traditional judicial system, on the relationship between lower courts and can not do the full
independence of the judiciary; the other hand, the degree of hot spots in the case from the point of view, the Court of First
Instance judgment in the case should be more careful. the result was based on legal facts. "
iPad trademark attribution clearer. At 9:00 on February 29, has drawn attention to the "iPad" trademark dispute of Final Appeal in
iPad trademark attribution clearer. At 9:00 on February 29, has drawn attention to the "iPad" trademark dispute of Final Appeal in
the Guangdong Province Higher People's Court hearing. The date of the court for a new evidence of cross-examination procedures, Shenzhen Proview Apple iPad trademark attribution of heated discussions. The court stated that the
outcome of the case will choose to announce.
It is worth noting that on the previous day, Apple officially released to the media, invitations, press conference held on March 7
It is worth noting that on the previous day, Apple officially released to the media, invitations, press conference held on March 7
at the Pacific Time the next generation of the iPad.
Analysis of the industry, with the final results and iPad3 market time approximation, the dispute negotiations reached a climax
Analysis of the industry, with the final results and iPad3 market time approximation, the dispute negotiations reached a climax
stage, and the benefits to reach a consistent point in time or will iPad3 landing. cell phone cases dropship
Proview recently in California, Apple charges.
California Superior Court Judge Mark Pierce, Mark Pierce, was approved on May 4, Apple submitted in February rejected the
Proview recently in California, Apple charges.
California Superior Court Judge Mark Pierce, Mark Pierce, was approved on May 4, Apple submitted in February rejected the
request of the Proview California complaint.
Proview Apple a few years ago to buy the iPad trademark of fraud, its allegations against Apple's Guangdong Province, said in
Proview Apple a few years ago to buy the iPad trademark of fraud, its allegations against Apple's Guangdong Province, said in
the indictment. The court asked the two sides try to reach a settlement. cell phone case wholesale
Proview after a U.S. lawsuit, Apple asked the court to undo the case, the reason is that both sides had already agreed to resolve
Proview after a U.S. lawsuit, Apple asked the court to undo the case, the reason is that both sides had already agreed to resolve
all legal disputes in Hong Kong. A copy of the award show judges Pierce to support this view, he wrote that Proview can not
prove to choose Hong Kong is "unreasonable or unfair".
Apple spokesman reiterated a previous statement, said the company purchased from Proview iPad trademark is legitimate, saying
Apple spokesman reiterated a previous statement, said the company purchased from Proview iPad trademark is legitimate, saying
"Proview refused to perform in China, the agreement between them." Yet could not be reached to Proview spokesman to
comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment