{{tabMeta[tabKey].title}}
{{tabMeta[tabKey].desc}}
Title
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
{{item.title}}
{{ item.content.replace(/<[^>]+>/g, '') }}
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Last week was a particularly prolific one on the IPKat, with insights from all around the world. Ready to catch up? Let’s set sail!
Friday Fantasies
Here's a rundown of all the fascinating events and opportunities this Kat has come across this week!
Patents make surprise appearance in UK consultation on precision breeding framework
Yesterday, the UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) published the results of their consultations about a proposed Precision Bred Plant Variety List for England. The feedback showed support for labelling to indicate the precision bred status of seeds and other plant reproductive material, and intriguingly, many responses also advocated that the variety list should provide transparency about patents, such as a requirement to disclose "any existing or pending patents".
Notional claim splitting: an Australian perspective on multiple priorities
Multiple priorities within a single claim are recognised under Article 4F of the Paris Convention, allowing different parts of a patent claim to benefit from distinct priority dates. While Europe has fully recognised multiple priorities within a single claim for many years, other jurisdictions, including Australia, have adopted a more restrictive approach.
Regional Launch of the Global Innovation Index 2025 in Riyadh Highlights the Arab Region’s Innovation Momentum
Riyadh, October 6, 2025 — The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia hosted the regional unveiling of the Global Innovation Index (GII) 2025 under the theme “2025 and Beyond: Fueling Economic Growth through Innovation.” The event, held at The Garage innovation hub, was co-organized by the Research, Development and Innovation Authority (RDIA) and the Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property (SAIP), in collaboration with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
Museums of the Future and Copyright: Preservation of and access to cultural heritage in the age of AI
The seminar “Museums of the Future and Copyright: Preservation of and access to cultural heritage in the age of AI” took place successfully on 7 October 2025 at the Museum of Cycladic Art in Athens.
Germany Trademark Renewal Guide
Maintaining your trademark in Germany is essential for protecting your brand assets and avoiding legal and financial risks. This guide covers key aspects of German trademark renewal: validity periods, application windows, remedies for missed deadlines, fee structures, renewal during transfers or changes of ownership, and portfolio management strategies.
Twitter (X) Trademark Strategy: Strategies, Challenges, and Future Prospects
In the digital age, social media platforms have become an indispensable part of people’s daily lives. Twitter, the social media giant symbolized by a blue bird, has captivated hundreds of millions of users worldwide since its launch in 2006 with its unique short-form content sharing and interactive communication style.
Instagram’s Trademark Strategy from a Global Perspective: Strategic Analysis and Challenges
Since its launch on October 6, 2010, Instagram has grown into one of the world’s most influential social media platforms. Developed by Kevin Systrom and Mike Krieger, this application gained rapid popularity with its unique photo-sharing feature and was acquired by Meta for $1 billion in 2012. As of March 2025, Instagram’s total registered users have surpassed 2 billion, with monthly active users stabilizing at around 1.5 billion (projected based on trends from Meta’s latest financial reports). Daily, the platform generates over 500 million pieces of content—including photos, videos, and Stories—spanning a wide range from personal life updates to brand marketing.
The party's over: EBA leaves late interveners stranded (G2/24)
This Kat has often observed that arriving late to the party can have its drawbacks. The best treats are gone and you risk being left behind when everyone suddenly decides to leave. A similar fate can befall a party in patent proceedings at the EPO. The Enlarged Board of Appeal has just provided a clear, if perhaps unwelcome, answer for latecomers. In G 2/24, the EBA has confirmed the existing case law that an appeal is over when the original parties withdraw, and an intervening party cannot single-handedly keep it going.
[Guest post] Time to redesigns designs: the UK government launches a wide-ranging consultation
Former GuestKat Darren Meale (Simmons & Simmons) is bringing IPKat readers an analysis of the recently launched public consultation on the potential review of the UK design and copyright system.
The emergence of “relevant ranges” and retroactive insufficiency in Australia and the UK
The concept of “relevant ranges”, discussed by the UK Supreme Court in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd [2020] UKSC 27 (Regeneron) and reinforced in Illumina Cambridge Ltd v Latvia MGI Tech SIA & Ors [2021] EWHC 57 (Pat) (Illumina), has recently emerged as a significant issue in Australian patent law. Kat friend Claire Gregg (Davies Collison Cave) is here to
[UPCKat] Lessons from the ebb and flow of the Insulet and EOFlow UPC dispute
Insulet and EOFlow clashed at the UPC over medical devices for insulin delivery, based on Insulet’s patent EP4201327. US-based Insulet developed and sold the “Omnipod 5” wearable insulin pump, while South-Korea-based EOFlow manufactured the “EOPatch” insulin pump. The Milan Central Division (CD) dismissed EOFlow’s revocation claim by default, but did not go so far as to find EOFlow infringing by default.
[Guest post] Designs, Dilution and Dates: The Almost Forgotten Case C-749/24 – Van Ratingen v Versuni
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following guest contribution by Katfriends Eva Maierski (Lubberger Lehment; Member of the Committee for Design Law of the German Association for Intellectual Property Law and Member of the Designs Team of Marques) and Henning Hartwig (Bardehle Pagenberg; Chair of the Committee for Design Law of the German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property) on a request made by the Hof van beroep te Brussel, Belgium, for a preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the interpretation of provisions of EU design law (C-749/24). While the referral has meanwhile been withdrawn, the raised questions still require a clear answer.
The Cheshire Kat: easyGroup’s claim against Premier Inn over ‘rest easy’ fails
There has been a flurry of decisions handed down this year in cases brought by easyGroup. easyGroup is the company behind a number of ‘easy’ brands, most famously the easyJet brand founded by Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou in 2000. The most recent of these was a case brought by easyGroup against the UK hotel chain Premier Inn:
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
What a week for the IPKat — filled with stories about copyright infringement tests under scrutiny, a co-writing lawsuit reaching an amicable resolution, toy bricks in legal limbo, a public transit melody overcoming legal challenges, and the statistics everyone loves. Here’s the gist, ready for you:
Selective distribution meets parallel trade: Higher Regional Court of Munich on exhaustion, licensing and prestige
The Higher Regional Court of Munich has handed down a practice-oriented judgment on trade mark exhaustion in selective distribution systems – one that will interest luxury and cosmetics brands, marketplace resellers and anyone drafting ‘don’t-sell-to-them’ clauses. In its decision (6 U 2795/23e) the Court confirmed that a brand owner who supplies independent authorized retailers puts the goods on the market within the meaning of Art. 15(1) EUTMR. Contractual sales restrictions in the dealership agreement do not prevent exhaustion.
DesignEuropa Awards 2025: A celebration of innovative European design – by Mary White
On 23 September 2025, the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) will host the sixth edition of the DesignEuropa Awards in Copenhagen. The Awards celebrate remarkable designs and their creators, and demonstrate how registered design rights protect these products. This article briefly explores the history of the Awards, highlights the importance of design protection in Europe, and illuminates best practice examples of how creativity can deliver real-world impact.
KIPO to offer IP training to Nobel Prize-level Women Scientists
KIPO·WIPO·UNESCO to empower Global Women Leaders in Science- - Hosting the IP Leadership Course for laureates of L'Oréal–UNESCO For Women in Science International Awards -
New minister appointed with responsibility for intellectual property
The Intellectual Property Office CEO has welcomed the new minister.
{{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
