|
????一方是全球最具價(jià)值的公司，另一方是正處于困境的中國電子產(chǎn)品制造商，如果無法籌措到資金將被香港證交所停牌。周三，當(dāng)事雙方，即蘋果公司（Apple）和唯冠公司（Proview），圍繞商標(biāo)糾紛在上海某法院展開了正面交鋒。 ????雙方爭奪的焦點(diǎn)是：iPad商標(biāo)。iPad是蘋果公司自iPhone以來推出的最成功的新型電子產(chǎn)品。 ????蘋果聲稱，公司于三年前以55,000美元的價(jià)格購買了iPad商標(biāo)的全球使用權(quán)。唯冠公司曾與美國國家半導(dǎo)體公司（National Semiconductor）進(jìn)行過短暫合作以銷售i-Pad產(chǎn)品，該產(chǎn)品是模仿蘋果公司iMac的低成本山寨貨。唯冠公司稱蘋果公司存在疏忽，未從唯冠公司的中國子公司——深圳唯冠手中購買商標(biāo)權(quán)。 ????據(jù)美聯(lián)社（AP）報(bào)道，深圳唯冠的代理律師提出：“蘋果公司沒有權(quán)利銷售冠名為iPad的產(chǎn)品。” ????據(jù)《華盛頓郵報(bào)》（the Washington Post）報(bào)道，蘋果公司的代理律師反駁：“唯冠公司沒有產(chǎn)品，沒有市場，沒有消費(fèi)者，也沒有供應(yīng)商。它一無所有。” ????“蘋果公司在中國市場的銷售額非常大。蘋果的忠實(shí)粉絲們?yōu)榱速徺I蘋果產(chǎn)品甚至排起了長隊(duì)。如果執(zhí)行該禁令，不僅會損害蘋果公司的銷售量，而且會損害中國的國家利益。” ????唯冠的代理律師則針鋒相對，毫不讓步： ????他說：“不能購買蘋果產(chǎn)品中國人就會挨餓嗎？這根本就不是問題所在。法庭必須依法做出裁決。蘋果非得銷售這個產(chǎn)品嗎？難道就不能換一個名字？” ????法庭里擠滿了前來觀戰(zhàn)的一百多名記者。法官告誡雙方遵守法庭紀(jì)律，隨后宣布休庭。 ????法官的判斷可能將取決于2009年一家英國企業(yè)從唯冠手中購買iPad商標(biāo)的交易細(xì)節(jié)。這家英國企業(yè)當(dāng)時(shí)秘密效力于與蘋果公司，從唯冠國際控股的臺灣子公司那里購買了iPad商標(biāo)權(quán)，并認(rèn)為是iPad的全部使用權(quán)。而深圳唯冠稱，該交易中并未包括中國大陸地區(qū)的商標(biāo)權(quán)。 |
????The world's most valuable company and a troubled Chinese electronics manufacturer that's about to be delisted from the Hong Kong stock exchange unless it can come up with some cash squared off in a Shanghai courtroom Wednesday. ????At stake: the trademark for Apple's (AAPL) iPad, the most successful new electronics gadget since, well, the iPhone. ????Apple claims it bought worldwide rights for the trademark three years ago for $55,000. Proview, which briefly partnered with National Semiconductor to market the i-Pad, a low-cost knock-off of Apple's iMac, claims Apple slipped up and neglected to buy the rights from Shenzhen Proview, the company's Chinese subsidiary. ????"Apple has no right to sell iPads under that name," the lawyer for Shenzhen Proview argued, according to an AP report. ????"Proview has no product, no markets, no customers and no suppliers. It has nothing," the lawyer representing Apple countered, according to the Washington Post. ????"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." ????Proview's lawyer would have none of it: ????"Whether people will go hungry because you can't sell iPads in China is not the issue," he said. "The court must rule according to the law. Do you absolutely have to sell the product? Can't you sell it using a different name?" ????More than 100 reporters packed the courtroom to watch the fractious exchange. After admonishing both sides to respect the rules of the court, the judge adjourned the hearing. ????His decision may rest on the details of the 2009 transaction in which a British firm, secretly working for Apple, bought what it believed were all rights to the iPad trademark from Proview International Holdings' Taiwanese subsidiary. Proview Shenzhen claims that the Chinese rights were not part of that deal. |
相關(guān)稿件
最新文章