.png?width=500&height=250&name=%E7%9F%A5%E7%9A%84%E8%B2%A1%E7%94%A3%E4%BA%8B%E5%8B%99%E6%89%80%E3%82%A8%E3%83%9C%E3%83%AA%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9%20(500%20%C3%97%20250%20px).png)
1. Position of the entire system Trademarks in Canada are protected by the Trademarks Act...
Trademark law revision trends (including promulgation schedule)
In China, moves toward the fifth revision of trademark law are gaining momentum. In its 2025 legislative plan, the State Council of China has clarified its policy to submit a trademark law reform bill to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. The main contents of the Trademark Law Amendment Bill (draft published in January 2023) includestrengthening regulations on malicious pre-emption of trademark applications (so-called misappropriated applications), thorough enforcement of trademark use obligations, optimization of examination procedures, stronger supervision of agents, and stronger compensation for damages for infringement acts. These measures are aimed at countering the ``mass registration of unused trademarks'' and ``mass filing of malicious trademarks'', which have been viewed as problems in recent years, as well as curbing the abuse of trademark rights enforcement and strengthening the protection of well-known trademarks. The proposed amendment received over 3,000 opinions from both Japan and abroad, many of which have been adopted or partially adopted.
The revised Trademark Law could be discussed and approved by the Standing Committee as early as 2025, and could be implemented as early as 2026. Experts have predicted that the amendments will take time as they are structural and significant, and that they are expected to be implemented after 2026 (*projection as of 2023). Companies and practitioners need to prepare for major system changes that will accompany the reform, such as a shift from a registration-based system to a usage-based system and strengthened measures against bad faith filings.
Latest implementation of examination and application practices by the National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA)
Over the past year, CNIPA has made several important operational changes and notifications regarding trademark examination and application procedures.
-
Introduction of expedited examination system (July 2025): On July 18, 2025, CNIPA promulgated the revised “Expedited Examination Measures for Trademark Registration Applications”. This is a system in which the examination of trademark applications that meet certain requirements is completed within 20 business days after the request for examination is approved. Applications are limited to applications of high national importance, such as trademarks related to strategic emerging industries such as aerospace and quantum technology, national/ministerial priority projects, and emergency response. The reality is that it is difficult for foreign companies and individuals to use this service because a letter of recommendation from a central or local government agency is required to receive an expedited review. However, Chinese companies have the advantage of being able to quickly acquire trademark rights in national strategic areas.
-
Publication of the Similar Group Code Correspondence Table for Japan, China, and South Korea (April 2025): On April 7, 2025, CNIPA jointly published the **"Similar Group Code Correspondence Table"** with the Japan Patent Office (JPO) and the Korean Patent Office (KIPO). This corresponds to the 12th edition of the Nice Classification (2025 edition) and shows the correspondence between similar group codes used in trademark examinations in Japan, China, and Korea. It is designed so that users filing trademark applications in various countries can use it to search for existing registered trademarks and predict similarity judgments, and is expected to improve the transparency and predictability of examinations. This correspondence table has been published every year since 2022 and is becoming established as part of the three countries' cooperation in the trademark field.
-
Continued crackdown on bad-faith trademark applications: CNIPA continues to focus on eliminatingbad-faith trademark applications, such as bulk filings for commercial purposes and taking advantage of trends. For example, in 2023, we formulated the ``2023-2025 Bad Faith Trademark Application Governance Plan''** and are working to curb malicious applications by improving various legal systems and examination standards. In addition, CNIPA executives stated at a press conference that ``malicious trademark preemption actions that harm the national and public interests will be promptly dealt with,'' and administrative crackdowns are being strengthened, including at local levels. In practice, there is a tendency for registrations to be refused or ex officio to be invalidated more and more for applications where there is clearly no intention to use or unauthorized trademarking of famous names.
Notable precedents regarding trademark refusal, invalidation, and opposition (2024-2025)
The following are important precedents regarding decisions of refusal, non-registration/invalidity, and opposition to trademarks announced and finalized in the past year.
-
Michelin case (cross-class protection of well-known trademarks): In the invalidation trial case regarding French tire manufacturer Michelin's well-known trademark "MICHELIN", the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (first instance) denied confusion between different industries, but the Beijing Higher People's Court (appellate court) changed its judgment from the perspective of preventing dilution of famous trademarks. The defendant company had registered a trademark that included its company name, ``Mechelin,'' etc., for toys, but it was determined that the trademark is similar in appearance and name to the well-known ``MICHELIN,'' and because it is well known, even dissimilar products (such as playing cards) could cause confusion of origin and dilution of the trademark. On February 8, 2024, the Beijing High Court canceled CNIPA's judgment and ordered CNIPA to reconsider the trademark. This judgment is noteworthy as it concretely demonstrates the cross-category protection (anti-dilution protection) for well-known trademarks based on Article 13, Paragraph 3 of the Chinese Trademark Law.
-
Douyin trademark invalidation case (prominence of an Internet company): In the dispute over the video sharing platform Douyin, which is the Chinese version of TikTok, the trademark of an internet service that has grown rapidly in a short period of time was exceptionally quickly recognized as a well-known trademark. A third party applied for the trademark "Dou Hai Yin" for travel services, etc., and the Dou Yin operating company filed a request for invalidation on the grounds of imitation of a famous trademark (violation of Article 13 of the Trademark Law). Although CNIPA determined that "Douyin" was not well-known due to its short period of use, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (first instance) pointed out that when evaluating trademark popularity in the Internet industry, it is necessary to go beyond the traditional "3-year registration, 5-year use" period requirements and take into account industry characteristics such as the number of users, market coverage rate, and growth rate. In fact, in just two years since its launch in 2016, "Douyin" has exploded in popularity with over 500 million users in Japan, and has been recognized as a well-known trademark reflecting this rapid brand penetration. This case casts a new light on the protection of emerging brands in the digital economy, and can be seen as a legal precedent demonstrating the flexible application of examination standards.
-
“L’OIE DES LANDES” Trademark Opposition Case (Protection of Foreign GI): In 2024, the Chinese authorities (CNIPA) announced a trademark opposition case regarding the geographical indication (GI) “Geese of Landes (L’OIE DES LANDES)” for French foie gras, etc. as one of the “2024 Typical Examples of Trademark Opposition/Review Cases.” When a company in Shanghai applied for this French trademark in Class 29 "Meat", etc., the French appellation of origin organization filed an opposition, and CNIPA refused registration on the grounds that the applied trademark contained a well-known geographical name and was likely to cause misunderstanding as to the quality and origin of the product. Specifically, we believe that including the word ``Landes region geese'' may lead to misunderstanding of the country of origin, and as the applicant has no connection to the region, there is a risk of misleading consumers if it is registered. This judgment is based on Article 10, Paragraph 1, Item 7 (prohibition of public order and morals and deceptive signs) and Article 16, Paragraph 1 (prohibition of unfair use of geographical indications) of the Trademark Law. This case shows that the Chinese authorities are proactive in protecting GI of foreign products based on the agreement with the EU, and provides a sense of security to domestic and foreign rights holders.
New trademark issues related to the development of AI and digital technology
With the rapid development of AI technology and the digital field in recent years, several new issues and trends have arisen in trademark practice.
-
Acceptance of classification of Metaverse/NFT-related trademarks: From January 2024, China has also expanded the treatment of virtual goods and NFT-related services in terms of trademark classification. Following the revision of the Nice Classification 12th Edition (2023 Edition), CNIPA has adopted 16 new products and services related to the Metaverse, NFTs, crypto assets, and AI as standard in five classes (Classes 9, 35, 38, 41, and 42), including ``downloadable NFT-certified image files,'' ``virtual clothing,'' ``blockchain provision services,'' and ``entertainment services in virtual environments.'' This is a major step forward from China, which has traditionally been reluctant to protect trademarks in this field. In fact, in China, as of 2022, approximately 80% of trademark applications related to virtual products were rejected, but the addition of significant items in 2024 is said to have made it easier for brand owners to obtain rights protection in the virtual space. This change is in response to the expansion of the Metaverse market and companies' use of NFT**, and can be said to be an update to trademark practice in line with the digital age.
-
Responding to trademark applications taking advantage of the AI boom: Taking advantage of the trend of generative AI such as ChatGPT, a series of trademark applications for related names have been filed in China. CNIPA is wary of these developments and has set out a policy tostrictly crack down on fraudulent trademark applications for well-known AI platform names and technical terms. At a press conference in April 2024, Director-General Shin Chang-yu declared that, as part of efforts to support technological development in the AI field through the intellectual property system, ``we will strictly crack down on fraudulent registrations of trademarks such as ``DeepSeek.'''' This is to check the trademark vandalism that takes advantage of new technology and social booms, and in fact, we are responding quickly, such as in cases where trademark applications such as "ChatGPT" and "GPT" have been filed one after another, and registrations have been postponed (*Reference information). Companies also need to pay attention to whether their AI technology brand or service name has been filed by a third party. In addition, with the spread of generated AI, it has been pointed out that there is a risk** of AI imitating and abusing other people's trademarks, and there is a possibility that regulations and guidelines for such actions will be formulated in the future.
-
International cooperation in terms of intellectual property systems: Dealing with digital technology is not just a topic for one country, but also for international cooperation. In addition to the aforementioned cooperation between China, Japan, and Korea, in 2024, the intellectual property offices of China, Japan, and Korea included ``building an intellectual property system that can respond to rapid technological changes such as AI and IoT'' in a joint statement as an item for continued cooperation. In this way, the authorities of each country are demonstrating a cooperative attitude with an eye to the future, and it is thought that international discussions will deepen in the future regarding the development of rules for the trademark system in line with the age of AI (for example, the protection of trademarks created by AI and the way trademark rights should be exercised in virtual spaces).
Other topics that practitioners and companies should pay attention to
In addition to the above, there are several other topics regarding the trademark system and operation that you should be aware of in practice.
-
New Interpretation in the Criminal Field of Intellectual Property (Clarification of Trademark Counterfeiting): On April 24, 2025, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate jointly promulgated the "Interpretation on the Application of the Law to Criminal Cases of Intellectual Property Infringement". This interpretation systematically indicates the judicial standards for IP crimes in general, such as trademark crimes and trade secret infringement crimes, and in particular clarifies definitions that have been at issue in practice to date, such as the requirements for a crime related to counterfeiting of service marks and the criteria for determining "same product/same trademark." This interpretation is expected to make it easier to pursue criminal liability for misuse of trademarks in the service industry, for example, and strengthen the deterrent power of trademark protection. Practitioners will need to incorporate the contents of this interpretation into their judgments of criminal risks and strategies for enforcing rights.
-
Trend in increasing damages in civil lawsuits: In recent years, Chinese courts have been increasingly awarding large damages or punitive damages that are close to the legal maximum amount for trademark infringement. For example, in a case from the Beijing Intellectual Property Court in 2024, the defendants were ordered to pay a total of 5 million yuan (approximately more than 100 million yen) in damages and an injunction for a ``full chain'' violation of trademark infringement and unfair competition, as multiple defendant companies were involved in a counterfeit product business involving the kitchen equipment brand ``Lao Ban'', including factories, sales, and distribution. In order to deter intellectual property infringement, the judgment granted the maximum amount of legal damages (5 million yuan), and the High Court also rejected the defendant's appeal. In this way, there is an increasing tendency to pursue severe civil liability for malicious infringements, and companies are strengthening measures to deter infringements, and in the event of infringement, they may be able to obtain large amounts of compensation by collecting appropriate evidence.
-
Strengthening guidance through publication of typical cases: In China, typical cases (case precedents) are published every year in both the judiciary and administration, and the trademark field is no exception. In April 2025, the Supreme People's Court announced the ``2024 Typical Cases for Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rights,'' indicating judicial responses to new areas such as AI face swap cases (copyright infringement). The Beijing Intellectual Property Court has also announced the best cases for 2024, with a total of eight cases selected from each field of patents, trademarks, copyrights, and antitrust. It is characterized by its emphasis on protection of innovation in emerging industries such as seeds, platform economy, and data fields, as well as strict measures against intellectual property infringement. In the trademark field, the above-mentioned Douyin and Laoban cases were included, and the focus was on brand protection in the digital economy era and dealing with systematic trademark infringement. These published examples serve as practical guidelines, so it is important for companies and agents to regularly check trends and utilize them in their own brand strategies and dispute response.
As mentioned above, while China's trademark system and practices have made great progress over the past year, they are also facing new challenges. While the system is being improved by amending laws and reviewing examination standards, it has become clear that the system is adapting to technological innovations such as AI and the Metaverse, and that it is taking a strict stance against malicious trademark practices. As companies and practitioners doing business in China, it is necessary to keep a close eye on these latest trends and take review of appropriate trademark strategies and measures to protect rights.
References/information source list (past year/in order of publication)
| # | Title/Document name | Transmission institution/media | Release date | One-line summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 《National Legislative Council 2025 Legislative Plan》 | State Council Office | 2025‑05‑14 | It is clearly stated that the Trademark Law reform bill will be submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress in 2025. (Government of China) |
| 2 | 《Commercial label note report 请fast checkout method》 public notice (No. 634) | National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) | 2025‑07‑18 | Formal introduction of expedited examination system within 20 business days for trademarks of strategic emerging industries, etc. (cnipa.gov.cn) |
| 3 | China, Japan, and South Korea “Similar Group Group Generation Chart” (NCL12‑2025 edition) | Japan, China and South Korea three agencies jointly (reported by Kita Michi Kinho) | 2025‑04‑09 | A similar group code comparison table for three countries corresponding to the 12th edition of the Nice Classification (2025 text) has been published. (〖Kita Michi Report〗First page) |
| 4 | 《Notification of the 2025 edition of the 12th edition of the 2025 Dictionary for the University of China》 | CNIPA Trademark Office | 2024‑12‑26 | From 2025‑01‑01, NCL12‑2025 will be officially adopted and the classification table will be revised (including NFT and virtual product items). (sbj.cnipa.gov.cn) |
| 5 | 2024 trademark opposition/examination typical proposals (10 cases) | CNIPA | 2025‑04‑26 | Selected notable cases involving foreign GIs, such as“L’OIEDESLANDES” trademark opposition. (cnipa.gov.cn) |
| 6 | Beijing Court 2024 10 examples of trademark authorization and judicial protection cases | Beijing Higher People's Court | 2025‑05‑08 | "MICHELIN" vs. "Mikirin" Published cross-class protection cases such as invalidity cases. (cta.org.cn) |
| 7 | 4·26 Special Edition | Beijing Intellectual Property Court 2024 Proposal Example | Intelligence/Beijing IP Court | 2025‑04‑26 | Presented 8 cases demonstrating rights protection in the digital field, includingDouyin rapid celebrity recognition case. (ipeconomy.cn) |
| 8 | 4・26 Special Edition | Beijing Intellectual Property Court 2024 case example (infringing "old board" trademark) | Intelligence/Beijing IP Court | 2025‑04‑26 | Introducing the judgment that ordered a large compensation of 5 million yuan for infringement of the full chain of counterfeit products. (zhichanli.com) |
| 9 | 《Program for promoting high-quality quantity exhibition (2023-2025)》 | CNIPA | Announced in 2023‑01‑(continued until 2025) | Bad Faith Filing Governance Plan through 2023-25. Valid as of July 2025. |
| 10 | “两高”《A slightly problematic solution to the law applicable to criminal cases regarding the violation knowledge of law enforcement》 | Supreme People's Court/Supreme People's Procuratorate | 2025‑04‑24 | Reduced the standard of entry for IP crimes, including trademark counterfeiting, and clarified the raising of the upper limit for compensation. (Spp) |
AUTHOR
Takefumi SUGIURA （杉浦 健文）
EVORIX Intellectual Property Law Firm Managing Patent Attorney
Supports clients across IT, manufacturing, startups, fashion, and medical industries, covering patent, trademark, design, and copyright filings through trials and infringement litigation. Specialized in IP strategy for AI, IoT, Web3, and FinTech. Member of the Japan Patent Attorneys Association (JPAA), Asian Patent Attorneys Association (APAA), and Japan Trademark Association (JTA).