{{tabMeta[tabKey].title}}
{{tabMeta[tabKey].desc}}
Title
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
{{item.title}}
{{ item.content.replace(/<[^>]+>/g, '') }}
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
Influencers recognise risks of promoting pirated content and counterfeits, new study finds
The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) released ‘Influencers and IP’, the first study to examine how online creators across the European Union (EU) understand and engage with intellectual property (IP), and how this shapes what millions of young people see, access and/or buy online.
Trade mark piracy does not constitute bad faith – Really?
For more than three decades, Ferrari has not sold a single new Testarossa, yet, the trade mark ‘Testarossa’ is keeping the courts quite busy. The Court of Justice of the EU (‘CJEU’) issued a ground-breaking decision on genuine use by selling used cars and spare parts (Ferrari, IPKat here and me here). The General Court confirmed that the sale of second-hand cars can be sufficient to constitute genuine use (T-1103/23, IPKat here). The cause for these decisions is a dispute between Ferrari and a model car maker, who applied for ‘Testa Rossa’ trade marks. The German Patent Court found that these marks were not filed in bad faith (29 W (pat) 14/21, IPKat here). Now, the German Supreme Court has weighed in on the issue of bad faith (case I ZB 6/25).
[Guest Post] USPTO Director orders re-examination of video game patent, citing prior art not considered by the Examiner
The IPKat is pleased to share the below guest post from Kat Friend (and this Kat's colleague) Aaron Trebble (Lewis Silkin) on his favourite subject of IP and video games.
Global IP Exchange Europe returns to Amsterdam in March 2026
The IPKat has learned and wishes to inform interested readers about the upcoming IQPC Global IP Exchange Europe, taking place on 16-17 March 2026 at the Leonardo Royal Hotel Amsterdam, Netherlands. The Exchange is especially, though not exclusively, for those working in-house.
BlockTexx®: Innovating textile recycling through intellectual property
In the heart of Australia's clean technology sector, BlockTexx® is revolutionising textile recycling with its innovative approach to IP. Co-founded by Graham Ross and Adrian Jones, BlockTexx® has developed a proprietary technology that addresses the pressing issue of textile waste. Their journey, marked by a strong IP strategy, offers valuable insights into how IP can drive innovation and sustainability.
Handling of Yangtze Memory-led patent challenges a slippery slope for USPTO
An order to show cause this week by US Patent and Trademark Office Director John Squires has rankled some in the intellectual property space, domestically and abroad.
England and Wales: legal privilege in the age of AI
Under English law, legal professional privilege will apply to confidential communications/documents that meet the tests of legal advice privilege or litigation privilege. Both tests are derived from the common law; privilege has not been codified in statute.
Hong Kong: legal privilege meets AI and cross-border risk
Legal professional privilege (LPP) is a legal right protected by common law and a constitutional right under article 35 of the Hong Kong Basic Law (Basic Law), which guarantees the right to confidential legal advice. Common law applies to Hong Kong by virtue of article 8 of the Basic Law.
Solidarity with the Philippines, and extension of deadlines following Typhoon Kalmaegi
The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) expresses its condolences and solidarity with the people of the Republic of the Philippines in the aftermath of Typhoon Kalmaegi
World's Largest IP Survey Reveals Increased Awareness and Trust in IP
Global awareness and trust in intellectual property (IP) systems has reached new heights globally, according to WIPO Pulse 2025, the world's most comprehensive survey of IP perception and awareness.
Accessory Liability for Tortious Acts Involving Breach of Intellectual Property Rights after Lifestyle Equities CV v Ahmed : a New Zealand Perspective
In 2010 I was involved in a case in the Auckland High Court (Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc v MDS Diagnostics Ltd)[1] (“Inverness”) which centred on the question of whether pregnancy testing devices which were procured by MDS overseas and sold in New Zealand breached certain copyright rights held by Inverness. From recollection the catalyst for the litigation was MDS having secured the contract for the supply of those tests to PHARMAC[2] at Inverness’ expense.
Veggie burgers are back in the game
After much uncertainty as to the fate of veggie burgers and veggie sausages, the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (the Department) has recently provided much needed clarity on the naming conventions for meat analogues. Meat analogues are also known in South Africa and elsewhere around the world as meat substitutes or imitation meats. They are foods that approximate the sensory qualities (which includes the primary texture and flavour) and/or the nutritional or chemical characteristics of a specific type of a meat product and are available in different forms such as coarse ground-meat analogues, emulsified meat analogues and loose fill. Their general appearance, presentation and intended use may also correspond to meat or a product made from meat. While this is the legal definition, quite simply, what meat analogue products are in ordinary parlance is plant-based meat alternatives that are suitable for a vegetarian, strict vegetarian and vegan lifestyle.
Türkiye’s new administrative trade mark revocation for non-use: EU alignment and procedural divergence
In 2024, Article 26 of Türkiye’s Industrial Property Code No. 6769 transferred the authority to revoke trade marks from the courts to the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office, with non-use cases expected to predominate. The reform aims to replicate the procedural efficiency of the EU model while preserving Türkiye’s distinct legal features.
Freedom of expression is only "due cause" if targeted at the trade mark holder, says Advocate General in IKEA-PLAN opinion
"Free political debate is an essential element of any democratic society," said Advocate General Szpunar in the opening of his Opinion in Inter IKEA Systems v Algemeen Vlaams Belang (Case C‑298/23), delivered today. Since EU trade mark law contains no specific provisions on freedom of expression, the Opinion confirmed that "due cause" has a key role to play in balancing freedom of expression and the rights of a proprietor of a trade mark with a reputation.
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Don’t worry, IPKat has your back with the latest in the IP world. Missed last week? Here’s the gist: Copyright, AI, and Personality Rights
The European Union Intellectual Property Office at Web Summit 2025 in Lisbon
Each year in Lisbon, Web Summit gathers over 70 000 participants, more than 1 000 speakers, thousands of startups and investors to discuss the latest trends shaping the global tech landscape and digital transformation.
World Intellectual Property Indicators: Global Patent and Design Filings Reach New Records in 2024, Trademarks Flat
Innovators and designers filed record-setting levels of applications for the intellectual property rights that protect their work in 2024, while demand for the trademarks that promote brands stabilized, according to WIPO’s World Intellectual Property Indicators (WIPI) report.
Mainland China, Hong Kong SAR and Macao SAR
Lexology Index: Mainland China, Hong Kong SAR and Macao SAR provides a complete overview of the legal market and features practitioners from top-tier law firms and consulting firms, ranging from boutique offerings through to full-service outfits.
Tariff Tracker: November edition
The November updates on the tariff tracker including updates in US tariffs, retaliatory tariffs and any after-effects, are set out below.
The virtual witness stand: AI's new role in arbitration advocacy
Artificial intelligence is no longer a futuristic concept in the legal world; it's a practical tool reshaping international arbitration. While headlines spotlight generative AI, the reality is that AI has supported legal teams for years, streamlining tasks and paving the way for the more advanced applications we see today, enhancing efficiency and allowing lawyers to focus on high-value strategic work.
{{item.basicTitle}}
Technology Domain
Publication Date
-
{{item.basicTitle}}
{{item.basicDescription.slice(0,250)}}{{item.basicDescription.length>250?"...":""}}
-
{{item.showText}}
-
{{item.showText}}
-
{{item.showText}}
-
{{item.showText}}
-
{{item.showText}}
-
{{item.showText}}
{{enterWhos.enText}} Trademark Registration
Registration process
Requirements
| Required information | Required documents |
|---|---|
|
No document required |
Please note:
- {{item}}
-
Principle of trademark protection:Principle of trademark protection;
-
Classification system of goods and services:Nice Classification; multi-class application is available;
-
Requirements for trademark use:The applicant shall provide evidence showing use of the trademark on the designated goods/services. Evidence of use for goods includes but not limited to: product photos printed with trademarks, product packaging, product labels, exhibition pictures, brochures, sales contracts and other purchase documents and information; but advertisements or media reports cannot be used as evidence of effective use. Evidence for services includes but not limited to: the brochures printed with trademarks, web page introductions, contracts for provision of services and other documents.
It is important to preserve the evidence when use a trademark in United States; otherwise the trademark will be partially or totally invalidated over the designated goods and services for not submitting sufficient mark use evidence during the stage of submitting the statement of use. -
An application for trademark registration shall be filed before the U.S. Intellectual Property Office (USTPO), and there must be a basis for filing application in the United States. There are mainly three types:(1)"Intended Use": This basis applies to cases where the trademark has not been used in the United States at the time of filing the application for registration. Based on "intention to use" to file an application for trademark registration, the application can be submitted directly without providing evidence of trademark use. However, when the official passes the trademark examination, an official notice will be issued requesting the applicant to submit evidence of use and the time of first use in the world and the United States in order to obtain a trademark registration certificate. If the trademark has not been used before it is approved for registration, the applicant may postpone the submission of the statement of use for a period of 6 months at a time, for a total of 5 times. If the use evidence cannot be provided in the end, the trademark will be invalid.
(2)"Actual Use": This basis is applicable to the case where the trademark was already used in the United States when the application for registration was submitted. When filing an application for trademark registration on the basis of "already used", evidence of the use of the trademark in the United States and the earliest date of use shall be provided.
(3)"Registration in Other Countries": This basis is used when an application for registration of the same trademark has been submitted in the origin country and the applicant cannot provide mark use evidence in the United States for a short period of time. Application information (including designated goods/services) in the US application should be consistent with those in the application of origin country, and a copy of registration certificate in the origin country should be provided.
Title
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
-
{{item.title.slice(0,60)}}{{item.title.length>60?"...":""}}
{{item.date}}
-
{{item.haha}}
- {{ipType[item.ipType]}}
-
Ready to Manage Your IP Portfolio Smarter?
From AI-powered trademark search to marketplace monitoring — the Kangxin IP Platform turns knowledge into results.
Explore the Kangxin IP Platform
Put your IP knowledge into practice with our comprehensive suite of AI-powered tools.
Disclaimer: We will do our best to present you with as complete and accurate information as
possible.
However, due to the limited frequency of content updates in some countries, all content is for reference
only and has no legal effect.
Jane Chen
