Chinese court postpones iPad trademark ruling for mediation

Three month since its release in mid-March, the new iPad is still unavailable in the official retail channels in the territory.
Written by Cyrus Lee, Contributor

The Higher People's Court of Guangzhou has started hearing the appeal by Apple on Feb. 29, 2012 after a Chinese lower court ruled in favor of the debt-ridden Chinese tech company Proview Technology (Shenzhen) which claimed the ownership of the trademark in China.

Despite that a ruling on an appeal case would normally be issued within three months in China, Zhao Le, a spokesman at the court's foreign affairs office, told Bloomberg on Thursday that it will not make a judgment as long as both parties continue talking.

Roger Xie, a Proview's lawyer, also confirmed that "the mediation will continue", and "there is no specific deadline." In May, Xie said Apple has offered compensation to resolve the dispute though a "big gap" remains between the two sides, according to the report.

Proview is seeking up to $1.5 billion on the basis of copyright infringement in the battle with Apple in China, according to reports in February. In the midst of the lawsuit against Apple, Proview has officially filed for bankruptcy.

Apple announced in late April that revenue drawn from China now explodes on a daily basis, with its quarterly revenue in China reaching $7.9 billion - almost 20 percent of Apple's total.

However, by May 9 when Apple announced the fifth batch of markets to launch the new iPad -- which makes the kit officially available in nearly 90 countries all over the world -- the date of the new iPad launch in China remains unknown.

Mainland media repeatedly reported that the kit is coming soon, with the the latest estimation being mid-June.  the Wall Street Journal reported in late May that an Apple device with third-generation, data capabilities has been issued the license required to begin sales in China. The report suggested that the kit, which is unnamed, should be Apple's third generation iPad.

Editorial standards