Apple pays Proview $60 million for Chinese iPad trade mark

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Apple pays Proview $60 million for Chinese iPad trade mark

Apple and Proview are to settle their dispute over the iPad trade mark in China for $60 million

Proview had originally sought $1.2 billion from the Californian company.

The Guangdong High People’s Court in Shenzhen announced that the two sides reached an agreement last week and that the mark is in the process of being transferred.

A company named IP Application Development initially bought from Proview what it believed to be the global rights to the iPad mark in 2006. IP Application Development assigned the mark to Apple, but when Apple tried to record the transfer, the China Trademark Office refused, on the grounds that it belonged to Proview.

Officials in China have already said that the mark is owned by Proview.

IP attorneys have been paying close attention to the case, saying that it raised a number of legal issues, including trade mark transfer, ostensible agency and contract law in China.

In an article published in Managing IP, Zhu Zhigang and Paul Ranjard of Wan Hui Da in Beijing said that for an assignee to receive a trade mark legally, there must be: (1) the signing of a contract, and (2) the approval of the contract by the Trademark Office and the publication of the assignment with the issuance of a new trade mark certificate.

An attorney for Proview told the Press Association that the financially troubled company had been looking for a settlement of about $400 million, but it felt pressure from its creditors.

“Proview owes Chinese banks 400 million”, said one attorney who spoke anonymously. “That means the banks are only going to get a fraction of what they are due.”

“It could have been a lot worse (for Apple),” he added.



more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Partner Jeremy Hertzog explains how his team worked through a huge amount of disclosure from Adidas and what victory means for the firm
Evarist Kameja and Hadija Juma at Bowmans explain why a new law in Tanzania marks a significant shift in IP enforcement
In the wake of controversy surrounding Banksy’s recent London mural, AJ Park’s Thomas Huthwaite and Eloise Calder delve into the challenges street artists face in protecting their works and rights
Alex Levkin, founder of iPNOTE, discusses reshaping the filing industry through legal tech, and why practitioners’ advice should stretch beyond immediate legal needs
Cohausz & Florack, together with Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben, have taken action against Amazon on behalf of three VIA LA licensors
In the fourth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss unconscious bias in the IP workplace and how to address it
Greg Munt, who has moved from Griffith Hack to James & Wells after four decades, hails his new firm’s approach to client service
Practitioners warn that closing the Denver regional office could trigger a domino effect, threatening local innovation and access to IP resources
Law firms are rethinking litigation strategies after USPTO director John Squires said he would take control of PTAB challenges
News of Singapore planning to streamline the licensing framework for foreign law firms and a partnership between Avanci and Xprize were also among the top talking points
Gift this article