Things are always complicated when the lawyers get involved but this saga of Apple, Proview and the rights to the iPad name in China seems to have one more twist left in it. For the lawyers are suing to have the trademark delivered to them rather than to Apple that has just paid for it:

Chinese law firm Grandall has submitted an “asset protection application” to the Shenzhen Yantian District People’s Court requesting that the court temporarily seize the China iPad trademark as part of Grandall’s lawsuit against Shenzhen-based display device manufacturer Proview Technology, a subsidiary of Proview International Holdings (0334.HK). The seizure could affect the transfer of the trademark to Apple.

The background: Proview is a now bankrupt monitor manufacturer who a decade back has a computing product called the IPAD. Roughly speaking, a clone of a Compaq product which wasn’t all that dissimilar in basic function to an iMac. The product didn’t last very long and when Apple was looking to launch the iPad if formed a shell company and bought that IPAD trademark from Proview for some $35,000.

At least it thought it did. After the iPad was launched and became the huge hit that we know it is today Proview’s Mainland China subsidiary spoke up and said, well, actually, the IPAD rights to China weren’t sold along with those to other territories. Because the company doing the selling didn’t own them. This did raise a few eyebrows of course and after court cases on two continents and a certain amount of negotiation Apple agreed to purchase that IPAD (and thus iPad) trademark in China for $60 million.

Whether this was because they were convinced of the righteousness of Proview’s case or because they thought that launching the iPad officially in China would make a great deal more money than was being charged….well, make up your own mind upon that. And launch the product they did last week in that territory.

Which brings us to this last little twist. Grandall hasn’t been paid by Proview the $2.4 million they claim they are owed. Proview seems to be indicating that because they are bankrupt then they don’t have to pay immediately. Grandall is of course concerned that as they are bankrupt if they don’t get the money now then they never will. It’ll go off into the banks who are owed vast sums and that’ll be that. Worth noting that the law firm isn’t just trying to claim some success fee. They fronted all of the costs of the case as well: had to for Proview is bankrupt.

So, what the law firm has done is tried to have the IPAD trademark assigned to itself until it gets paid. Quite how much Proview cares about this I’m not sure. As they’re bankrupt there’s not a great deal that anyone can do to get the $60 million back from them. And quite what the law firm’s end game is I’m not sure either. If the trademark is assigned to them what happens next? Do they sue Apple again for violating the trademark owned now by the law firm? Hope Apple will help them out by coughing up the fees?

How many more twists and turns can this story have?

Web link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/07/27/apple-paid-60-million-but-still-might-not-own-ipad-in-china/

Edward Lehman, the managing director of a Chinese law firm Lehman Lee & Xu, who has been working in China as Legal Professional for the past 25 years, was invited by CCTV 9 's talk show on 1st August 2012 to comment on Apple vs. Samsung, the so called Patent Trial of the Century. Along with Mr. Edward Lehman,  Mr. Jin Haijun, a law professor with Renmin University and Mr. Luka Lu, Managing Director with Capital Associates were also invited to the show.

The Apple vs.Samsung trial started from 30th July and is expected to last as least four weeks. Each side has claimed their designs have been infringed by the other. The two companies have patent lawsuits pending in numerous countries and this trial has been billed the "patent trial of the century". Mr. Edward Lehman with the other two guest speakers had comments on the inadequacies of the current patent system, the impact on the mobile industries etc. people were concerning about because of this trial from each of their perspectives.

For their excellent show, please see the video on: http://english.cntv.cn/program/dialogue/20120802/108761.shtml