一方是全球最具价值的公司，另一方是正处于困境的中国电子产品制造商，如果无法筹措到资金将被香港证交所停牌。周三，当事双方，即苹果公司（Apple）和唯冠公司（Proview），围绕商标纠纷在上海某法院展开了正面交锋。

    双方争夺的焦点是：iPad商标。iPad是苹果公司自iPhone以来推出的最成功的新型电子产品。

    苹果声称，公司于三年前以55,000美元的价格购买了iPad商标的全球使用权。唯冠公司曾与美国国家半导体公司（National Semiconductor）进行过短暂合作以销售i-Pad产品，该产品是模仿苹果公司iMac的低成本山寨货。唯冠公司称苹果公司存在疏忽，未从唯冠公司的中国子公司——深圳唯冠手中购买商标权。

    据美联社（AP）报道，深圳唯冠的代理律师提出：“苹果公司没有权利销售冠名为iPad的产品。”

    据《华盛顿邮报》（the Washington Post）报道，苹果公司的代理律师反驳：“唯冠公司没有产品，没有市场，没有消费者，也没有供应商。它一无所有。”

    “苹果公司在中国市场的销售额非常大。苹果的忠实粉丝们为了购买苹果产品甚至排起了长队。如果执行该禁令，不仅会损害苹果公司的销售量，而且会损害中国的国家利益。”

    唯冠的代理律师则针锋相对，毫不让步：

    他说：“不能购买苹果产品中国人就会挨饿吗？这根本就不是问题所在。法庭必须依法做出裁决。苹果非得销售这个产品吗？难道就不能换一个名字？”

    法庭里挤满了前来观战的一百多名记者。法官告诫双方遵守法庭纪律，随后宣布休庭。

    法官的判断可能将取决于2009年一家英国企业从唯冠手中购买iPad商标的交易细节。这家英国企业当时秘密效力于与苹果公司，从唯冠国际控股的台湾子公司那里购买了iPad商标权，并认为是iPad的全部使用权。而深圳唯冠称，该交易中并未包括中国大陆地区的商标权。

    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.