Apple tells court banning iPad sales would 'hurt China's national interest'
"Proview has no product, no markets, no customers and no suppliers. It has nothing," Hu Jinnan, a lawyer representing Apple, told the court, according to Reuters. "Apple has huge sales in China. Its fans line up to buy Apple products. The ban, if executed, would not only hurt Apple sales but it would also hurt China's national interest."
More than 100 reporters were present for the hearing. A ruling from the Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Court is expected to be handed down soon.
Proview has contended that it owns the rights to the iPad name, and seeks to halt sales of Apple's hot-selling tablet in China. The company has even has some small successes in having units pulled from shelves in a handful of cities.
Officials with Proview indicated once again on Wednesday that they are open to settle with Apple out of court. Roger Xie, a lawyer representing Proview, said negotiations have not yet begun, but a settlement outside of the court is "quite possible."
Proview's ownership of the iPad name stems from a product it released in 1999 with the same name. It was a basic desktop computer that was designed to be easy to use.
Proview believes that Apple's purchase of the iPad name from one of its Taiwanese affiliates was an unauthorized transaction. For its part, Apple has contended that Proview "refuses to honor" the existing agreement between the two companies.
As its struggles against Proview have dragged on, Apple this week threatened to sue the company for defamation. Apple has claimed that Proview has released false and misleading statements to the press.
66 Comments
Come on, let's put this issue to bed already.
"Proview has no product, no markets, no customers and no suppliers. It has nothing," Hu Jinnan, a lawyer representing Apple, told the court, according to Reuters. "Apple has huge sales in China. Its fans line up to buy Apple products. The ban, if executed, would not only hurt Apple sales but it would also hurt China's national interest."
Weak. Very weak.
What happenend to "We bought it fair and square"?
What happened to "Look at these emails"?
Hmm.. interesting argument
On an unrelated note, I thought I recognised that Proview logo from somewhere - then I remembered that we used to sell them when I was working at PC World back during the late 90's and early 00's.
They were pretty good quality at the time. Here is a review I found on one of them...
The reporting on this issue has been strange. I don't know the finer legal points, though I see the logic in each side's claims. It really comes down to legal details on the transaction that few of us here are qualified to speak on. (I happen to fall into the category that thinks that the seller is trying to break the contract because they realize they WAY underpriced their product, but I cannot be certain that they don't have a legal point in their favor.)
Nevertheless, I find it odd that Apple's lawyers talk about the impact of the verdict on China. It also seems strange that the judge would say that iPad sales could not be stopped because it is popular. Seems to me, the case should be decided based on points of law and not what is difficult or most profitable...
What happenend to "We bought it fair and square"?
What happened to "Look at these emails"?
I would assume these legal arguments were presented as well, but adding this political consideration seems apropriate in a country known for a judicial system that takes politics into consideration...