Apple and Proview have initiated talks in an attempt to resolve an ongoing legal dispute over the iPad trademark, IDG News Services reported on Friday. Earlier this week, a Chinese high court recommended the two companies find a way to mediate the ongoing dispute. The mediation talks were voluntary, however both companies agreed to meet. “I think there is some hope the talks will lead to a resolution,” Zhao Zhanling, a legal expert on China’s information technology law, said, adding that if the negotiations were to fail, the higher court will be forced to move ahead and make a ruling. Apple and Proview have been locked in a high-profile legal dispute over whether or not Apple has the right to use the use the iPad name in China and elsewhere. If Apple were to lose the case, the Cupertino-based company could be banned from selling the iPad in China. Apple maintains that it licensed the trademark from Proview in 2009, however the Chinese company claims the transaction in question is invalid.20 April 2012
Apple in settlement talks with Proview over iPad trademark dispute
Apple and Proview have initiated talks in an attempt to resolve an ongoing legal dispute over the iPad trademark, IDG News Services reported on Friday. Earlier this week, a Chinese high court recommended the two companies find a way to mediate the ongoing dispute. The mediation talks were voluntary, however both companies agreed to meet. “I think there is some hope the talks will lead to a resolution,” Zhao Zhanling, a legal expert on China’s information technology law, said, adding that if the negotiations were to fail, the higher court will be forced to move ahead and make a ruling. Apple and Proview have been locked in a high-profile legal dispute over whether or not Apple has the right to use the use the iPad name in China and elsewhere. If Apple were to lose the case, the Cupertino-based company could be banned from selling the iPad in China. Apple maintains that it licensed the trademark from Proview in 2009, however the Chinese company claims the transaction in question is invalid.
0 comments
Post a Comment