China’s New Trademark Law: Key Changes to Registration and Enforcement
China’s revised Trademark Law introduces significant changes to the way trademarks are examined, opposed, and enforced.
As discussed in Part 1, the amendments respond to longstanding concerns surrounding bad-faith filings, unused registrations, and the growing volume of trademarks in China’s system.
For brand owners, some of the most important changes involve bad-faith applications, opposition deadlines, suspension of proceedings, and administrative penalties.
Bad-Faith Filing Rules Become More Targeted
The revised law places greater emphasis on whether a trademark applicant has a legitimate intention to use the mark.
Applications made without an intention to use the mark and that clearly exceed the needs of normal production and business operations may be refused.
The law also provides additional consequences for certain bad-faith registration activity.
This is significant because it moves the system toward earlier identification and rejection of problematic applications rather than relying solely on post-registration challenges.
For businesses, that reinforces the importance of conducting trademark clearance and developing a filing strategy based on actual and reasonably anticipated business activities.
Greater Accountability for Trademark Agencies
The revised law also addresses the conduct of trademark agencies.
Where an agency knows or should know that an application involves prohibited conduct and nevertheless accepts the engagement, the agency may face legal consequences.
This reflects a broader effort to make participants throughout the trademark-registration process more accountable for bad-faith activity.
The Opposition Period Is Shorter
One of the most practical changes for trademark owners is the reduction of the opposition period.
Under the revised law, the opposition period will be two months instead of three months.
That one-month reduction may have significant consequences for international brand owners.
Once a potentially conflicting mark is identified, the trademark owner may need to:
-
Investigate the applicant;
-
Review the application and goods or services;
-
Evaluate the potential conflict;
-
Gather evidence;
-
Determine whether opposition is appropriate;
-
Coordinate with Chinese counsel; and
-
Prepare and file the opposition.
All of this must occur within a shorter window.
Why Trademark Monitoring Matters
The shortened opposition period makes trademark monitoring particularly important.
Without monitoring, a company may not learn about a potentially problematic application until after the opposition period has expired.
By contrast, an effective monitoring program can alert the brand owner while there is still an opportunity to evaluate and potentially oppose the application.
For companies with valuable brands, monitoring is therefore not simply an administrative task. It can be an important component of a broader enforcement strategy.
More Flexible Suspension of Proceedings
The revised law also provides greater flexibility regarding suspension of trademark proceedings when another matter may affect the outcome.
This can be relevant where multiple applications, prior rights, opposition proceedings, invalidation proceedings, or other related matters overlap.
The ability to suspend proceedings in appropriate circumstances may help avoid inconsistent results and allow related matters to be addressed in a more coordinated manner.
Administrative Penalties
The new law also strengthens administrative consequences for certain bad-faith trademark activities.
Rather than addressing problematic conduct only through examination, opposition, or invalidation, the revised framework provides additional mechanisms for administrative enforcement.
This is an important development because it reinforces the principle that trademark registration should serve legitimate commercial activity rather than simply create barriers for other businesses.
Protection for Well-Known Trademarks
The revised law also strengthens provisions concerning well-known trademarks.
For major international brands, this reinforces the importance of maintaining evidence demonstrating the reputation and recognition of a mark.
Companies should consider preserving evidence such as:
-
Advertising and marketing materials;
-
Sales information;
-
Media coverage;
-
Awards and recognition;
-
Consumer exposure;
-
Market presence; and
-
Other documentation demonstrating brand recognition.
Legitimate Use Becomes More Important
The amendments also provide greater clarity regarding legitimate trademark use, including descriptive, functional, and indicative uses.
This distinction matters because not every use of a word, phrase, design, or other element necessarily functions as a trademark.
For enforcement purposes, businesses should consider whether the use at issue actually identifies the source of goods or services or instead serves another purpose.
What Should Brand Owners Take Away?
Several practical lessons emerge from these changes.
- First, act early. The shorter opposition period leaves less time to respond to potentially conflicting applications.
- Second, monitor strategically. Businesses should consider whether their monitoring systems are identifying potentially problematic applications early enough.
- Third, document use. Evidence of legitimate use may become increasingly important in protecting and enforcing trademark rights.
- Fourth, evaluate bad-faith activity promptly. The revised law provides additional tools for addressing problematic filings.
The new framework therefore places greater emphasis on proactive trademark management.