iPhone facing potential trademark issues in China?

Apple's on-again, off-again deal with China Unicom to officially bring the iPhone to China may still be up in the air, but it looks like it could now also be facing some trademark issues that could potentially further hold up its release. Apparently, China's Hanwang Technology owns the trademark for "i-phone" in the country, which could force Apple to make a deal with 'em before it enters the market (sound familiar?). Interestingly, Apple does actually own an "iPhone" trademark in China, but it apparently only covers computer hardware and software, while Hanwang's trademark covers mobile phones. According to Hanwang, however, the two aren't actually in talks just yet, and it's not saying what it plans to do if Apple decides to go crazy and announce a move into China without its blessing.

[Via mocoNews.net]

[dsteve303 @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:37PM]

WHAT ABOUT ALL THE CHINESE PHONES THAT RIP OFF THE IPHONE!!!

CAPS

[slamEVIL @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:45PM]

i know, apple's getting screwed twice!
first because china doesn't honor u.s. copyright laws they can copy the iphone as much as they want.
second apple has to honor their copyright laws and can't sell the phone until they pay up.

it's poetic justice

[kevin @ Jul 2nd 2009 5:13PM]

that's what makes this article so funny

[Dest @ Jul 2nd 2009 6:24PM]

The Chinese sell iphone ripoffs in their own market. They do not sell them here and they would not be allowed here. The same is true vice versa. You think that if some American ripped off a small Chinese company's product, anything would be done or there would be any news about it? Of course not. The broken records talking about the irony of the Chinese caring about trademark law don't seem to realize this.

[RSammy @ Jul 2nd 2009 10:36PM]

Dest is right.It's nothing to do with 'honoring' US law - and it's trademark, not copyright. As a market, China is outside of US legal jurisdiction, so any iPhone rip offs manufactured and sold in China are perfectly legal. Of course, even if it was unlawful, many companies would still do it anyway. But the point still stands.

[JZ @ Jul 3rd 2009 2:42AM]

Wait.. so an US company is crying caus some other country is being mean to them? It´s almost like a country who doesnt listen to the WTO.. like the US himself. C´mon the companies in the US as well the US itself is hiding behind trademarks and all other protection mechanisms as long as it suits them but on the other hand willingly breach agreements. If bored google the following 'Irish Music' and 'Havana Club' cases. Nah... this isn´t news this is just the US and their companies getting what they deserved, getting the cock from somebody bigger then them.

[anonymous j @ Jul 3rd 2009 4:23PM]

@Dest, RSammy, JZ

What did you guys expect? Objectivity? How silly of you! Did you forget? Hypocrisy, naivete and ignorance, its the Engadget reader way.

[Alex @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:37PM]

Since when does any of this matter in China?

[Kamokazi @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:42PM]

Since it would be a U.S.-based company infringing on a Chinese trademark and not the other way around :-)

[kjb434 @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:08PM]

Yeah,

China could bitch slap Steve Jobs in their courts. Actually, they would just take him out back and use a gun. It's not like they have any civil justice system.

[Andrew @ Jul 2nd 2009 5:22PM]

no one has noticing the fact that theyre making a distinction between a computer and a mobile device... wehn in reality the line is blurring, when does a "mobile phone" stop being "computer hardware" or vice versa i guess.

[loosely_coupled @ Jul 2nd 2009 7:06PM]

Exactly... China and all their shameless IP pirating companies can go to hell. Many chinese "design" firms and OEMs are like big vacuum cleaners of western technology. They steal or reverse engineer all of the intellectual property and patents of western firms who are dumb enough to outsource manufacturing there, and then they produce billions on units for the domestic market and other developing countries without paying a DIME in licensing or royalties. They do the same thing with military equipment, pharmaceuticals, software, etc. They take advantage of all of the research and development that goes on in the world by ripping everything off, and then provide nothing in return.

This behavior is not only tolerated, but encouraged by the communist government. They would love nothing more than to have China emerge as a major dominant power in the world, and they couldn't care less if that process was vastly accelerated by copying the superior technology of the western world. Anything to show that China is "proud" and "successful".

If not for greedy off-shoring companies (and a greedy public that wants everything cheap from Walmart), then western countries could implement a total embargo of non-essential goods on China until they clean up their enormous cesspool of intellectual property piracy and knock-off manufacturing. Unfortunately this will never happen as the USA in particular is reliant on China for manufacturing, investment, debt, etc.

[m3tric @ Jul 2nd 2009 7:44PM]

True, it doesn't really matter. Since Apple can't sell any hypePhones anywhere but US of A

[Eric Bandholz @ Jul 2nd 2009 9:16PM]

It doesn't matter in US either: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_iPhone

Not the first time Apple has been beaten to the punch with the name iphone.

[anonymous j @ Jul 3rd 2009 4:31PM]

loosely coupled you don't have a clue about what you're saying.

[xconan @ Jul 4th 2009 3:25AM]

loosely... rabid fanboism without any knowledge of the the company that evangelize for... iphone was owned originally owned by Cisco since 1999 but no longer manufactured the product in 2005 or 06 until later on.

[larryryan0824 @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:42PM]

China doesn't need the iPhone after all the shit that their putting Apple though. I say fuck em'.

[ALBGunner04 @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:16PM]

Apple still wants their $$$

[toxicpiano @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:19PM]

those 3 dollars will be worth it

[Blu-Sam @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:48PM]

Apple want $$ then they pay to staffes and staffs spend their $$$ from US foods to make their business better!

[ncb1397 @ Jul 2nd 2009 8:37PM]

"those 3 dollars will be worth it"

More like 200 billion dollars. China spends atleast 200 billion a year on consumer electronics. If the iPhone took %1 of that market, that would be 2 billion in revenue a year for apple, or roughly a 5% revenue increase for Apple. I am not saying that it would take 1%, just saying that the chinese don't spend chump change. You might say that these are all low end goods. Well, China has 400,000 millionaires roughly. That is about the fifth the millionaires of the country with the most (US). Surely, they buy higher end stuff.

[Eric @ Jul 3rd 2009 6:16AM]

The people in China that want an iPhone and can afford an iPhone will buy them despite official representation or not. They already support the Chinese language and are easily unlocked.

I don't know the dynamics of the Chinese cell phone market. If it is one that supports subsidized handsets and carrier contracts then the sub $200 iphone would open up a huge market for Apple.

[the4thheat @ Jul 3rd 2009 9:23AM]

lol @ 3 phones...the Chinese already buy more cars every day than Americans do, and they spend tons of money on those cars too since cars tend to cost more there.
The thing is that the cost of living is still pretty damned cheap in China, so if you make it into the middle class or make it big most of your income is all disposable income since stuff like your rent, eating out, and clothes (well unless you want name brand stuff) are cheaper in China. And there's already tons of people with jail broken iPhones in China anyway. When it first got jail broken the phones were worth a hell of a lot of money there.

There's still parts of China where people are poor, but it's not like Apple sells a lot of iPhones in broke American cities either.

[Templarian @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:44PM]

Why when they have awesome phones like the one below?
http://cn.engadget.com/2009/07/02/qiye-qq-mobile/

[Mark @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:53PM]

Holy crap, it's a penguin phone!!! I gots to get me one of those!

[chumanfu @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:56PM]

haha i want one

[Vic De Zen @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:04PM]

That's an adorable phone. Definitely for tiny hands though.

[Loonie @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:34PM]

Christ, I'll take one of those over any iPhone, Pre, Nokia or whatever.

[slamEVIL @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:40PM]

AWESOME!

[micruz @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:47PM]

Anyone else in the mood for chinese food?

[Templarian @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:51PM]

I was actually thinking about getting some after work at the mall if I go get a hair cut. Not as good as the one down the street, but to lazy to call it in.

[joe23521 @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:51PM]

The two of you owe me 3 IQ points.

[kevin @ Jul 2nd 2009 5:17PM]

only if you unclog my arteries

[Richard Ford @ Jul 3rd 2009 4:42AM]

Coke has a trade mark here. It is in the pinyin form "Ke Kou Ke La"

Which when pronounced sounds like Coke-a-Cola.

The cool bit is - is that those phonetics in china mean basically "Good to drink when thirsty".

A lot of you people just aren't cut out for business - stick to geek and tech. You really hear people who are in the real world making money bitching like this? No. Get over it. The world is not the USA. The world is large and great and diversified and there are great ways to make money if you are able to be flexible, creative and ingenious.

But then again if you just want to live in the west all your life, think that the world does not expand beyond your countries borders and your way of thinking is the ONLY way... well keep up the life of job hunting to work for others and living in a system that you rely on as a "life support system" because you are too weak and sensitive to do it otherwise.

Apple will sort this out, they won't care and they will make money. That is why they are apple and the people work for them and most people here are, well.... useless tech schmucks that can't make money and haven't realised that their jobs are going the same way as textile workers did 50 years ago.

Sad.

[Kieran @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:48PM]

I don't see the problem, the Chinese company has the trademark for "i-phone" yet Apple has "iPhone", even without the capatilisation they are two different words. The Chinese one also only applies to phones, Apples covers computer hardware and software which could easily cover the iPhone as it is technically a computer.

[redcard @ Jul 2nd 2009 3:54PM]

Coca-Cola probably doesn't own a trademark on 'c0ca-c0la', but you think anyone would be allowed to realase a product with that name?

You don't see the problem cos you haven't studied trademark law.

[Wwhat @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:07PM]

You'd expect the chinese to trademark product with chinese charaters rather than english.

[Wwhat @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:07PM]

characters even

[Kieran @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:08PM]

Yes, I do believe someone would be able to release a product under that name. It would not be pronounced the same, as it has the "o's" replaced with "0's" and so it would be completely different. If the consumer pronounced it as "Coca-Cola" then it is them who is at fault.

The simple fact is the Chinese company own the trademark to something and Apple own the trademark to something else, they are not the same and are thus different, and Apples iPhone would only be marketed under the trademark that they own. They should have no worries, if the Chinese company tried to do something about it they would fail in court.

[RideRed @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:20PM]

Kieran,
What you're saying is completely true, IF this was a case in the United States. Your point would hold up completely as it should, but we're not talking about the U.S. copyright laws here. This is happening in China and thus would probably go in favor of the Chinese company, not Apple.

Sorry,
Epic Fail

[bhoopes @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:25PM]

Actually, it likely doesn't matter how it's actually spelled, it's still a trademark violation. I have no experience with trademark law in China, but here in America, one of the things that courts look at is what is called the "likelihood of confusion." And in that test, the court will look at, among other things, the "sight, sound, and meaning" of the terms.

It is a case-by-case analysis. For instance, if a company is advertising its product on the radio, does a difference in capitalization help prevent consumer confusion? Probably not, because the capitalization doesn't change the pronunciation of the word. Similarly, a hyphen in iPhone does not really change the perception of the mark to potential consumers.

Again, I'm not sure how the Chinese law works, but I doubt they would let this fly. We sure wouldn't.

[Zuwxiv @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:46PM]

Bhoopes has it right.

When we're talking about trademarks, we're talking about brand-identifying names, logos, designs, colors, etc. Sometimes even sound or smell. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-conventional_trademark ) You have to remember what the purpose of intellectual property law is - in this regard, it's about making the consumer sure that they are buying what they intend to, and protecting the company that produces a product.

Coca Cola didn't waste all the money of designing, trademarking, and defending its name just so it can say "Coca Cola." It doesn't want imitations - and neither do consumers. I don't want red and white soda cans that read "Caca Colo." (or c0ca c0la) The laws are generally based around reasonable confusion to the consumers - if it's likely that I could make a mistake and pick up the wrong soda, it's likely because a competitor has copied the brand name / style in order to effectually "steal" sales from the original.

Imagine if you had a company - named Kieran, for example - and you worked hard to build a strong image and sell a good product. And suddenly, along comes Kleran, in store aisles right next to yours, virtually indistinguishable packaging. Your revenue probably drops, and if Kleran isn't as good a product, so does the public conception of the quality of your product. Sure, you could blame it on the customers - but that doesn't solve anything. It's the fault of the company who ripped you off, even if they did have a different name by one letter and packaging with a slightly different shade of red.

[Mikey @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:48PM]

Kieran, you are completely wrong (about both the i-phone and c0ca-c0la) (again, at least if this was a U.S. case). As bhoopes pointed out, as long as there is a likelihood of confusion by ordinary people, it is a trademark violation.

But, if you really think i-phone is truly different than iPhone, and that c0ca c0la is truly different than Coca-Cola, then I triple-dog dare you to (a) start selling a phone, mobile or otherwise, under the name "i-phone," and (b) start selling a fizzy, sugary brown drink labeled "c0ca c0la." If you're right, you can make a ton of money, and Apple and Coca-Cola can't sue you and win... right? Right?

Hmmm

[bondsbw @ Jul 2nd 2009 6:25PM]

Wow, guys, think about how it will play out:

Hanwang: "You're infringing, give us money."
Apple: "Does your i-phone use computer chips and connect to the internet and such?"
Hanwing: "... yes..."
Apple: "Sounds to me like a computer. I propose a truce."

At worst, Apple will pay a few bucks to settle.

[Kieran @ Jul 2nd 2009 8:46PM]

I don't know why the hell I was down ranked for putting my point across, but I'm not going to bitch about it.

As you can obviously tell I haven't studied law at all, a good 80% of everything I have ever learned has been self taught and so sometimes I get things wrong or misunderstood. Although I'm wrong I really don't see why I should be, I understand that confusion can be had due to similar trademarks but when they are technically different I don't see what can legally be done about it. Some company could genuinely come up with the name "c0ca-c0la" without ever having heard of "Coca-Cola" and they are two completely different words, neither company should be able to "damage" the other due to consumer's confusion.
I know this point stands a little less with "i-phone" and "iPhone" as they would both be pronounced pretty much the same, but if presented in text they are still different and to me that means they should both be treated separately.
Again, I'm no expert on this matter and this is just my opinion, I accept that it's pretty much wrong under American law, but to me it's just common sense.

[ByuTM @ Jul 3rd 2009 2:26AM]

@Kieran#3

Your hypothetical where the person has never heard of Coca-Cola introduces another intricacy of trademark law: that of territoriality.

Rather than getting into the intricacies of trademark law, it's probably best just to start with the beginning: the two goals of trademark law. First of all, protecting the consumer from confusion. Second, protecting the producer/manufacturer's good name. If the introduction of a mark into the market could lead to confusion for your "average joe," then courts may well step in. If you start making t-shirts with a swoosh and/or a word resembling Nike, then you might cause confusion in your average consumer and you lessen Nike's good name.

Just remember these two points: that the government is protecting us from mistakenly buying Dorritos when we wanted Doritos, and that the government is protecting producers like Nike, Coca-Cola, Apple, etc. from having to deal with competing with people stealing their own brand identity.

That's all. Hope that helps and puts this discussion in context.

[dav @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:31PM]

Screw'em. Since when does anything on paper matter in China. The chinese hate the game and the players, because they can't compete.

[Loonie @ Jul 2nd 2009 4:37PM]

On the contrary, China has been doing very well off of "the game".

[raeesgillani @ Jul 2nd 2009 5:43PM]

just lost 'the game'

sigh : (

[Richard Ford @ Jul 3rd 2009 4:36AM]

Compete better than the USA. Less laws and problems. China is pure capitalism. You wouldn't survive a second here in business or in life because you are a weak, shrink wrapped food, western society by product. Quit the whinging - it is sad.