{{tabMeta[tabKey].title}}
{{tabMeta[tabKey].desc}}
Title
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
{{item.title}}
{{ item.content.replace(/<[^>]+>/g, '') }}
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
AI Use at the Israeli Patent Office and Beyond: Transforming the Future of Innovation Protection
The Israeli Patent Office is taking bold steps toward integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into its patent examination process, a move that could reshape the experience for Applicants. While AI has already helped standardize procedures and reduce wait times, its application in substantive examination brings profound implications. From streamlining prior art searches to leveraging predictive analytics for patentability assessments, AI is poised to become an indispensable tool for examiners and Applicants must be prepared.
Wednesday Whimsies
The IPKat proudly presents some upcoming events, exciting opportunities, and several paws-itively interesting IP news for readers!
Audi’s S6 and S8 beat NIO’s ES6 and ES8
After NIO lost its trade mark battle with Audi before the Higher Regional Court of Munich regarding its model designations ‘eS6’ and ‘eS8’ (IPKat here), the General Court recently also confirmed a likelihood of confusion between Audi’s ‘S6’ and ‘S8’ trade marks and NIO’s ‘ES6’ and ‘ES8’ marks (cases T-593/23 and T-598/23).
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Didn’t catch the latest in IP news last week? Don’t worry, here’s your chance to catch up on everything you might have missed!
Pitfalls of cell therapy manufacturing IP - A case study (T 0868/23)
The recent Board of Appeal decision in T 0868/23 is a powerful example of the potential fragility of process IP in the field of cell therapy. The decision in T 0868/23 illustrates how a cell therapy process invention may evolve over time to the detriment of the IP. Processes can be notoriously difficult to pin down, leaving even seemingly broad claims vulnerable to attack in the face of the EPO's unyielding approach to added matter.
CRYSTAL VAPE: Proving unregistered earlier rights
There is a sizeable dispute rumbling along in the High Court of England and Wales between a Chinese company (Shenzhen SKE Technology Ltd – “SKE”), which manufactures vaping products under the name CRYSTAL BAR and other signs including the word CRYSTAL, and a UK company that wholesales vapes (Bargain Busting Ltd – “BB”).
Guide to Trademark Renewal in the United Kingdom
Trademarks, as one of vital intangible assets for businesses, embody brand value and market reputation. In the United Kingdom, effective trademark management and renewal are critical for safeguarding brand rights. This guide is aiming to provide with a detailed overview of the trademark renewal process in the UK, key considerations, and strategies to ensure efficient renewal, helping businesses maintain the continuity of their brand rights.
Real-time alerts and AI plug-ins in EUTM EasyFiling form help reduce uncertainty, improve predictability and enhance the user experience
A new set of intelligent pre-assessment services, some powered by artificial intelligence (AI), is now live in the EUIPO’s Easy Filing application form for European Union trade marks (EUTMs). This important step is part of the EUIPO’s commitment under its Strategic Plan SP2030 to equip customers with similar tools to those used by EUIPO examiners, empowering them to detect problems early-minimising the risk of refusal and ensuring their financial investment is more secure
The evolution of e-filing
A high-quality and relevant IP system depends partly on the quality of applications received. Information that is accurate, comprehensive and timely makes processes more efficient and reduces problems with errors down the line. That in turn means greater certainty both for applicants and holders of IP rights and for third parties who rely on publicly available information.
KIPO Cracks Down on Fake Beauty Products - Beware of Counterfeit “Water-like” Cosmetics
The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), led by Commissioner KIM Wan Ki, announced on June 19, 2025 that KIPO's Special Judicial Police on Trademarks (hereafter referred to as "Trademark Police") has recommended to the prosecution the indictment of four individuals on charges of violating the Trademark Act through the distribution of counterfeit cosmetics.
Is unauthorised fashion upcycling lawful? Not according to French first instance court
On 10 April last, the Tribunal Judiciaire de Paris ruled that S.A.S. MAISON R&C, S.A.S. ATELIER R&C, and Géraldine Lugassy Demri (defendants) had infringed the copyrights and the word mark ‘Hermès’ owned by SOCIÉTÉ HERMES INTERNATIONAL and S.A.S. HERMES SELLIER (claimants/Hermès) by reproducing the original graphic works – imprinted onto Hermès’ silk square scarves – on the denim jackets they produce and market, and by using the sign ‘Hermès’ both on those jackets and on their websites and social media accounts.
South Africa's new plant breeders' rights system comes into force, with notable parallels to the EU system
Earlier this month, a new plant variety rights system came into force in South Africa. The legislation repeals the Plant Breeders’ Right Act 1976 and introduces many changes, which took effect from 1 June 2025. The framework intends to bring South Africa into compliance with UPOV 1991, but also echoes certain features of the EU plant variety rights system.
Northern District of California's busy week on AI and fair use
It's been a thrilling (in the loosest sense) week for copyright enthusiasts, as two rulings have been issued by judges in the Northern Direct of California in two separate cases brought by book authors (namely Bartz v Anthropic and Kadrey v Meta) on the question of fair use in AI training. In both cases, the relevant judge granted summary judgment (at least partially) in favour of the AI developer, but the two courts had quite different views on the topic of "market dilution".
Sunday Surprises
A hot week is coming to an end and it would not be the same without the hottest news from the IP world.
Major usability upgrades now live on the Out-of-Commerce Works Portal
The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) is proud to announce the release of three major developments in the Out-of-Commerce Works Portal : API integration, a reengineered search engine, and a fully redeveloped alert system.
WIPO Pathfinders Report
This study by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) summarizes the findings from more than 45 expert interviews in the fields of innovation and creativity. It explores how intellectual property (IP)-based innovation and creativity may evolve by the year 2034. The experts identified a range of factors that could significantly influence the way intellectual property promotes innovation and creativity over the next decade.
Brazilian PTO Fees Increase in One Month
As announced in our May 13, 2025 newsletter, the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO) has published a new schedule of fees, which will take effect on August 7, 2025.
From Template to Trade Mark: Is Your Logo Legally Yours?
In today’s digital-first world, graphic design platforms like Canva and Adobe Express have become indispensable tools for entrepreneurs, startups, and creatives. These platforms offer accessible, affordable ways to create professional-looking logos. But a critical legal question arises: Is it possible to obtain trade mark protection for a logo you created with these platforms?
Wednesday Whimsies
This Kat is pleased to bring readers the weekly summary of IP news, events and opportunities! Thank you, Anastasiia!
Australian IP Report 2025: SMEs with a deliberate IP strategy deliver more innovative solutions
Smart businesses are taking advantage of flexibility in Australia’s intellectual property (IP) system to deliver more innovative products – crucial to raising productivity and living standards – a new report reveals.
{{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
