Saturday, May 14, 2016

Schadenfreude over Chinese ruling against Apple

I couldn't help but smile at the news of a court case in China recently. A company called Xintong Tiandi Technology, which sells purses, phone cases and other leather goods emblazoned with the name "IPHONE", won a trademark case brought against it by Apple, the world's most valuable company.
The court ruled that Apple had failed to prove that its iPhone was well known in China before Xintong Tiandi filed its trademark application back in 2007. In fact, it turns out that Apple applied for a trademark of the name for its electronic goods in China in 2002, but it was not actually granted until as recently as 2013. The ruling kind of begs the question* of why they would want to trademark such a name in the first place if Apple iPhones were not well known...
I'm embarrassed to admit that I tend to smile at pretty much anything bad that happens to Apple, which I know is very childish and unjustifiable. I don't even know why I have such a downer on the company - other than a general, instinctive, sour-grapes dislike of the fat-cat successful corporation - but I suspect that much of it can be traced back to their anti-PC advertising campaign some years ago, which I found so smug and negative that my hackles would rise as soon as I encountered it. Probably not a good basis on which to form long-term opinions but, hey, they spend millions on advertising to mould the opinions of unsuspecting punters, so if they make their bed...

*Yes, I am aware that "beg the question" technically means "assume the conclusion of an argument", rather than the more commonly-applied (but incorrect) meaning of "raise the question". But I've always thought the original usage such a silly phrase that I have made the phrase in its new meaning one of the few incorrect English usages that I sanction, and am more than willing to follow myself.

No comments: