a court in Beijing overturned a judgment in the year 2016, thewas Apple, to infringe the intellectual property rights of Chinese Smartphoneherstellers with the iPhone 6. It is also a sales ban by the table, which had imposed the Beijing intellectual property Office and subjected to a patent court shortly afterwards.
as the South China Morning Post reports the Court in the Chinese capital was of the opinion that the iPhone 6 is not violated the Exner of Shenzhen Baili now. The functions of the iPhone made the Apple Smartphone unique and allowed consumers to easily distinguish both devices.
in December 2014, Shenzhen Baili Apple had accused 100 C to have copied the design of the iPhone 6 from his Smartphone. In fact, both units have a similar body shape with rounded corners. Also components such as speakers, and rear-view camera are located in similar positions. Since the 100C is based of course ona confusion of the two devices should be as it has been determined the Court now actually excluded.
that the plaintiff makes an appeal against the judgment, appears unlikely. Already in June the Wall Street Journal reported, that Shenzhen Baili is apparently insolvent. Together with its parent company Digione, it should have more debt than assets. At least to the three registered addresses of Shenzhen Baili and Digione there should have been no traces of both companies at the time.
the Attorney of the Smartphoneherstellers declared but in June 2016, the company is still active and will continue its fight against Apple. One even thinking on the newer models iPhone 6 S and iPhone 6 plus to expand the lawsuit.
China is a very important market for Apple. However, the revenues of the company from Cupertino in the people’s Republic fell in recent quarters continuously. In the first fiscal quarter, the negative was 12 per cent. Reason for this is the increasing competition from local vendors such as Huawei, oppo and vivo.
with patent courts in China made Apple so far no good experiences. 2016 a patent court ruled that a Chinese manufacturer may use the trademark “iphone” for leather goods. The company in question had secured 2007 the term as a trademark, two years before the official sales launch of the iPhone in China in 2009.
from Capex to Opex: turn companies just reinforced rigid investment costs in dynamic editions, which adapt to the business – IT capacity from the cloud, rather than from their own servers and be so flexible. Popularity: Infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) from the open Telecom cloud.
tip : how well do you know the iPhone? Check your knowledge – with 15 questions on silicon.de.