{{tabMeta[tabKey].title}}
{{tabMeta[tabKey].desc}}
Title
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
{{item.title}}
{{ item.content.replace(/<[^>]+>/g, '') }}
Jurisdiction
Type
Update Date
-
Public Notice : 25th Anniversary of the Designs Act, 2000
The Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM), under the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT), Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India, is pleased to announce the commencement of celebrations marking the 25th anniversary of the enactment of the Designs Act, 2000, under the theme: “Designs – Celebration of Aesthetic Creations”, beginning 25th May 2025.
Consultative Session on GR&TK with 1st Meeting of ORIC Forum-2025
FAISALABAD, May 26, 2025: Given the critical importance of Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge IPO-Pakistan arranged an interactive consultative session to discuss the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, and Traditional Knowledge (GR&TK) aligned with 1st Meeting of ORIC Forum, 2025.
Turkish Regulation on the Implementation of the Administrative Revocation of Trade Marks Is Finally Published
With the entry into force of the Industrial Property Code no. 6769 (“IP Code”) on 10 January 2017, the administrative revocation of trade marks has been introduced into Turkish Trade Mark Law and revocation proceedings are entrusted to the Turkish Patent and Trade Mark Office (“the Office”) instead of Turkish Courts. However, the implementation of administrative revocation was postponed for 7 years, and during this transition period, revocation requests continued to be filed before civil courts, as was before the enactment of the IP Code.
Shaping PTE Scope in Korea: How Korean Case Law is Defining Patent Protection During PTE
Over the past several years, local Korean generic companies have raised numerous challenges against pharmaceutical patents arguing that patent scope during the PTE (patent term extension) period is strictly limited to the specific form and specific use of the original approved product. This argument has been based on Article 95 of the Korean Patent Act, which states that "the effects of a patent whose term has been extended only reach acts of working the patented invention concerning the product whose approval was the basis for the term extension (and where the approval was obtained for a specific use, for that specific use only)." This provision has since been interpreted and clarified through a number of Korean court decisions. The following provides an overview of the legal landscape that has emerged from these rulings.
CNIPA issues legislative plan for 2025
On 25 April, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) outlined its legislative work plan for 2025, focusing on enhancing the legal framework to better protect IP rights and foster innovation.
New law enters into force on 31 May 2025
In a significant legislative shift, the Ukrainian Parliament has adopted a new law repealing the law adopted on 1 April 2022 that suspended intellectual property deadlines during the ongoing war. The new law enters into force on 31 May 2025, when all previously suspended IP-related deadlines will resume.
The new eMadrid （beta） is launched
On May 21, 2025, WIPO has launched a brand-new (beta) version of eMadrid, transforming how trademark professionals file and manage international trademark registrations.
Software Trademark Protection: Strategies and Global Layout from a Worldwide Perspective
In the digital age, software has become the core of technological innovation, making intellectual property protection in this industry all the more critical. As an essential vehicle for brand recognition, trademarks play a similarly indispensable role in the software sector.
KIPO Strengthens IP Cooperation with Patent Offices in Europe
Commissioner KIM Wan Ki of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) held bilateral meetings on April 30 in Munich respectively with Antonio Campinos, President of the European Patent Office (EPO), and Eva Schewior, President of the German Patent and Trade Mark Office (DPMA), to exchange views on key intellectual property (IP) issues and explore avenues for enhanced cooperation.
KIPO Launches ODA Project to Expand K-Invention Education to Cambodia
The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) has officially launched an Official Development Assistance (ODA) project aimed at introducing Korea's invention education model to Cambodia from 2025 to 2027.
KIPO Unveils ROK’s First Patent Applicant to the U.S.: Independence Activist Kwon Do-in
In celebration of the 80th anniversary of Korea's national liberation and the 60th anniversary of Invention Day, the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) has identified KWON Do-in (1888–1962), a Korean independence activist, as the first Korean to file a patent application in the United States.
First UPC decision to tackle infringement and validity of second medical claims （Sanofi v Amgen, UPC_CFI_505/2024）
The complexities of patenting new uses for known medical substances were recently considered by the Düsseldorf Local Division in the UPC's first decision on second medical use claims. The case of Sanofi v Amgen (UPC_CFI_505/2024) specifically addressed the novelty and infringement standards applicable to second medical use claims. The case is part of the long-running dispute between Sanofi and Amgen relating to PCSK9 antibodies across multiple jurisdictions and involving multiple patent families.
An LLM is not （yet） a person skilled in the art （T 1193/23）
In the new AI-age, where Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT can generate sophisticated textual answers in seconds, the relevance of AI to the patent industry is an active area of debate. The recent EPO Board of Appeal in T 1193/23 specifically questioned the reliability of LLM-generated interpretations for technical terms within patent claims. Central to this case was the question of whether the output of LLMs, trained on everything on the internet, can serve as evidence of how a person skilled in the art would interpret a technical term in a patent claim
TIPO’s Q1 2025 IPR Statistics Report
In the first quarter of 2025, TIPO received a total of 17,063 patent applications, comprising 12,202 invention patents, 3,232 utility model patents, and 1,629 design patents. This represents a 1% increase compared to the same period in 2024, with invention patent filings rising by 2% (Figure 1). Patent applications filed by resident and non-resident applicants accounted for 47% and 53% of the total, respectively. Compared to the same period last year, applications by residents declined by 2%, whereas those by non-residents rose by 5%.
Glaxo’s colour trade mark for inhalers invalidated
Abstract colour trade marks are notoriously difficult to protect in the EU, even in rather specialized product markets like that of inhalers. The German Patent Court recently invalidated Glaxo’s violet colour mark for such goods (case 25 W (pat) 29/22).
Global Strategy Analysis for Trademark Protection in the Stationery Industry
As competition intensifies in the stationery market, trademark protection has become a cornerstone for companies to safeguard their brand image and prevent infringement.
Nigeria’s Copyright Collective Management Regulations: Justice for Members Only?
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following guest post by Katfriend Seun Lari-Williams (PhD researcher at the University of Antwerp), commenting on recent legislative changes to the Nigerian collective management system.
Misleading invoices scams targeting IP applicants and rightsholders
We wanted to bring to your attention an important update from Europol, supported by the EUIPO, of the strategic report on misleading invoices targeting IP rightsholders and applicants.
Keep your trade secrets safe with an NDA
Before sharing confidential information with someone you are going to collaborate with, it is smart to ensure that the information is kept between you. You can do this with an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement). The agreement should be in place as early as possible – preferably before you start the dialogue.
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Catch-up on last week's IP news and events with the IPKat!
{{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
