{{tabMeta[tabKey].title}}
{{tabMeta[tabKey].desc}}
Title
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
{{item.title}}
{{ item.content.replace(/<[^>]+>/g, '') }}
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
The EUIPO’s Management Board and Budget Committee meetings took place from 3 to 5 June at the EUIPO, Alicante
The EUIPO’s Management Board and Budget Committee （MB/BC） are made up of representatives from the EU Member States, the European Commission, and the European Parliament.
E-Commerce MOU enables sustained proactive removal of counterfeit listings
Online platforms have demonstrated marked improvements in proactively removing counterfeit and infringing product listings, reflecting their continued commitment to the E-Commerce Memorandum of Understanding （MOU） spearheaded by the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines （IPOPHL） and the importance of synergy between platforms and the private sector to curb counterfeits in online marketplaces.
Why the US Copyright Office’s AI Copyrightability Report is dysfunctional
On January 29, the US Copyright Office （USCO） released its long-awaited Report on the Copyrightability of Generative AI （GenAI） outputs after setting an early example as a jurisdiction that would not grant copyright over AI-generated materials [IPKat here].
Intellectual Property Finance View | Supreme People's Procuratorate Releases 9 Typical Cases of Intellectual Property Protection
On April 25th, the Supreme People's Procuratorate （SPP） released the third batch of typical cases concerning the comprehensive judicial protection of intellectual property rights by procuratorial organs. This batch includes 9 cases, covering criminal, civil, administrative, and public interest litigation aspects of intellectual property prosecution. These cases fully demonstrate the achievements of procuratorial organs in strengthening the comprehensive judicial protection of intellectual property rights and serving the development of new quality productive forces.
With Judgments Attached | Supreme Court Releases 2024 Typical Intellectual Property Cases of People's Courts （8 Cases）
On April 21, the Supreme People's Court held a press conference for the 2025 Intellectual Property Publicity Week, releasing the "Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rights by Chinese Courts （2024）" and the 2024 Typical Intellectual Property Cases of People's Courts. Vice President of the Supreme People's Court Tao Kaiyuan, Chief Judge of the Third Civil Division of the Supreme People's Court Li Jian, and Deputy Chief Judge of the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court Qiu Zhonglin attended the press conference and answered questions from reporters. The press conference was hosted by Lin Wenxue, spokesperson of the Supreme People's Court.
Intellectual Property Protection by Chinese Courts （2024）
"Intellectual Property Protection by Chinese Courts （2024）" is published in both Chinese and English. The Chinese version shall be the authoritative version for interpretation purposes.
A Strategic Guide to Macao Trademark Renewal: Leading Your Brand into a New Era
In the thriving landscape of Macao, brand identity is not only a powerful tool for market competition but also serves as a bridge connecting businesses with consumers' emotions. As the significance of trademarks in commercial activities continues to grow, the issue of renewing registered trademarks in Macao has garnered increasing attention from many enterprises.
Meeting of the Chairman IPO-Pakistan with Multan Chamber of Commerce and Industry on IP Rights Protection for Agriculture Sector
MULTAN, May 28, 2025: An interactive session on protection of IP rights for agriculture sector was held at Multan Chamber of Commerce and Industry (MCCI), Multan on 28 May, 2025 by the Chairman IPO-Pakistan.
Meeting of the Chairman IPO-Pakistan with Agri-Tech Industry
MULTAN, May 28, 2025: An interactive session on protection of IP rights for agriculture sector was held at MNS Agriculture University, Multan on 28 May, 2025 by the Chairman IPO-Pakistan with the representatives of Agri-business representatives and progressive farmers from Multan region.
PAILL: Driving Innovation, Quality, and Empowerment in Salvadoran Pharmaceuticals
PAILL, a Salvadoran female-founded pharmaceutical company, grew from 6 to more than 1200 collaborators in 30 years. Today PAILL exports a variety of pharmaceutical products throughout the Central American and Caribbean region, using trademarks and licensing agreements. It is also recognized as one of the leading companies in the country thanks to both its economic performance as well as its public image built around PAILL’s corporate social responsibility efforts.
Can refugees take their GIs with them when fleeing? The case of Rügenwalder Teewurst
For the past three years, this Ukrainian Kat has been interested in the impact of wars on geographical indications (GIs). She saw, to her surprise, that GIs and wars are intrinsically related, to the point that GIs are featured in peace negotiations, as occurred with the Versailles Treaty.
Update to Trade Mark practice guidelines
We have recently updated our Conflicting Goods and Services list, which identifies associated trade mark classes whose goods or services are similar or closely related.
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Here is a quick recap of what you might have missed!
The Journal - May 2025
The May 2025 edition of the Journal is now available.
Smart Branding: In-Depth Analysis of Global Smartphone Trademark Cases and Brand Protection Strategies
In the highly competitive smartphone market, trademarks are not just brand identifiers, but also crucial indicators of a company's market position and intangible assets. From China to the United States, from Korea to Japan, and across Europe, the battles over trademarks reflect intense market competition, and underscore the importance of brand protection.
All to play for in CRISPR "first-to-invent" US patent battle as Federal Circuit instructs PTAB to reconsider
In the latest decision of the CRISPR patent wars, the US Court of Appeal of the Federal Circuit delivered its long-awaited opinion in Regents v. Broad Institute (Nos. 22-1594, 22-1653) earlier this month. However, rather than providing a clear resolution to the dispute, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the case, extending the already protracted battle over who first invented CRISPR technology for eukaryotic cells. The Federal Circuit's decision focused on two critical aspects of US patent law, the "conception" doctrine under pre-AIA first-to-invent provisions and the written description requirement. Away from the legal battles, the decision coincides with news of the first ever patient to be treated with a personalised CRISPR therapy (Musunuru et al. NEJM; 2025).
Event report: C5 Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe （Day 1）, Plausibility, UPC and antibody IP strategy
Last week, PatKat had the pleasure of participating in the 2025 C5 Annual Forum on Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe, held in Amsterdam. The conference was a reminder (if ever one was needed) that patent law never stands still. There was a lot of food for thought from the various panels and networking discussions. Some hot topics that caught PatKat's interest are discussed below. Thanks should also go to the conference organiser Andrea Tredenick, for a very efficiently run conference and thought-provoking agenda. See here for full details of the speakers and topics.
Objectively measuring the similarity of marks: A framework of ideas
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following guest post by Katfriend David Barnett (Brand Protection Strategist at Stobbs), proposing a more objective assessment of the similarity of signs in trade mark matters.
CJEU receives first referral on chatbots and copyright
Over the weekend, reports circulated that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has received its very first referral on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and copyright.
US space force: a trade mark or the sixth military branch?
On 7 May last, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Court), refused registration of “US SPACE FORCE” for numerous goods and services by affirming the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the US Patent and Trademark Office (Board). The reason for the Board and the Court to refuse registering the sign was the fact that it falsely suggested a connection with the US, which is a ground for refusal under s. 2(a) of the Lanham Act.
{{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
