In business, it is not an uncommon event that a seemingly seamless plan, even after strategic thinking and comprehensive deployment and with large manpower and material input, turns out to be a painful lesson because of negligence to details. Now, Apple’s iPad trademark event interpreted once again the meaning of “imperfection in perfection.” This kind of imperfection, however, will surely become a hidden danger when it appears in the intellectual property field.
Apple’s achievements are undeniable. It has the near-perfect R&D designs, compact and efficient production processes as well as low-input and high-return marketing strategy, which make it the most successful case of how a company can reach such global range. However, its negligence in intellectual property matters may lead to enormous losses. Some even speculate that Apple will have to change the name for iPad.
Intellectual property has become vital in today’s modern commercial society. Companies should pay enough attention to their IP strategies and should not tolerate any negligence in tactical details and day-to-day work. Last year more than 60 domestic companies which were ready to be listed failed to obtain listing because of the flaws in IP matters.
Once a company embarks on the path of development with IP as the core, no imperfection is tolerable in the careful and dedicated IP arrangement. IP-related defects must be solved as soon as possible and necessary inputs should not be restricted, otherwise the company will lose much more.
Before the iPad trademark event, Apple also purchased the iPhone trademark from Hanvon at the price of 8 million dollars when its products entered the Chinese market. Perhaps 8 million was not a big sum for Apple, which made it believe that the iPad trademark in China could also be purchased at a similar cost. Or, perhaps Apple thought that 8 million was too much and it could get iPad trademark via a third party at a much lower price. However, with the rapid growing awareness of intellectual property, the price for intellectual property is soaring in China. Apparently, Apple miscalculated the case and had to pay a hefty price for its own negligence and the tactics used to obtain the trademark at a lower price.
Apple provides a great deal of inspiration. How should Chinese enterprises conduct strategic transformations? Is it necessary to hold intellectual property as a core component? Enterprises that have established their core brands and technology strategies must once again re-examine the solidarity of their fundamental intellectual property and check the overall protection prior to its overall development. Flaws are inevitable, even in the most perfect arrangement, but they don’t have to be dreadful. The most important thing is to compensate for the defects. Negligence will cost great price, but ignorance will lead to even greater risks.
