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

Nick Groombridge shares how an accidental turn into patent law informed his approach to building a practice based on flexibility and balancing client and practitioner needs
Clarivate’s Ed White discusses the joy of measuring innovation and why patent attorneys are a special breed
National groups for the UK and the Netherlands have flagged concerns with the choice of venue, following a formal complaint from Australia’s national group
Rasenberger is the CEO at the Authors Guild in the US
Vold-Burgess is the client director at Acapo Onsagers and the former CEO at Acapo in Norway
Williams is the CEO of the UKIPO in the UK
Orliuk is director of the Ukrainian IP office
Julie is chief IP counsel at Teva in the US
Ludlam is chief IP and litigation officer at Lenovo, while Maharaj is chief licensing officer for Ericsson in the US
Campinos is the president of the EPO in Munich
Gift this article