Table of Contents
China adopted a revised Trademark Law on June 26, 2026. The new law will take effect on January 1, 2027.
Much of the commentary surrounding the revised law has focused on the statutory changes themselves. Foreign companies, however, should focus on what they need to do differently before the law takes effect.
The fundamentals remain the same: file early, register strategically in the classes and subclasses that matter, and monitor your trademarks. Companies should register broadly where appropriate, but each filing should be tied to a legitimate business, expansion, subclass, anti-counterfeiting, or defensive objective. At the same time, the revised law introduces several changes that make ongoing trademark portfolio management more important than before. At the same time, the revised law introduces several changes that will make ongoing trademark portfolio management more important than ever. For an explanation of why early filing remains so critical, see China Trademarks: Do You Feel Lucky? Do You?
Here are the five developments to which foreign brand owners should pay the closest attention.
1. Beginning January 1, 2027, you will have only two months—not three—to oppose conflicting applications
From a practical perspective, this is probably the most significant change.
Many foreign brand owners do little or nothing to monitor new trademark filings in China. Instead, they discover conflicting applications only by chance—through a distributor, customer, business partner, or local counsel—or, worse, after the mark has already proceeded to registration.
Reducing the opposition period from three months to two months makes this reactive approach considerably riskier. Companies with valuable brands in China should consider implementing a systematic trademark watch program so that newly published applications can be identified while opposition remains available. Waiting to stumble across a problematic application may no longer leave enough time to act.
The same principle applies well beyond China. Trademark rights are territorial, and each jurisdiction has its own opposition procedures and deadlines. In the United States, for example, the opposition period is generally just thirty days. Companies with international trademark portfolios should therefore consider implementing coordinated trademark watch programs across the jurisdictions that matter most to their business, rather than relying on chance to uncover potentially conflicting filings.
For companies that already use trademark watch services, the shorter opposition period also means internal review and decision-making should be streamlined so that instructions can be provided to Chinese counsel well before the new deadline expires.
2. Keep your registration information current
The revised law increases the consequences of failing to update a registration following changes to the registrant’s name, address, or other recorded information.
Under the revised law, unauthorized changes to a registered mark or to recorded registration information may result in an order to correct the registration and a fine of up to RMB 50,000. In serious cases, the registration may be cancelled.
In practice, this is also a matter of sound trademark portfolio management.
Companies relocate, reorganize, merge, and change names all the time. Whenever those changes occur, corresponding updates should be recorded not only with CNIPA, but also with trademark offices in other jurisdictions where the company owns registrations or has pending applications. Keeping trademark records current has always been a fundamental aspect of maintaining a global trademark portfolio, and the revised law underscores the importance of ensuring that those records accurately reflect reality.
3. Think carefully before changing your logo
The revised law reinforces another long-standing best practice: companies should review the trademark consequences before adopting a new or modified logo.
There are two separate issues to consider.
First, a registration protects the mark as registered. If a company materially changes its logo, the revised version may require a new trademark application. Continuing to rely exclusively on a registration for an older logo may leave the company without adequate protection for the mark it is actually using.
Second, use of a materially different logo may not be sufficient to prove use of the registered mark if the registration is later challenged in a non-use cancellation proceeding. Even where a company has continuously used its branding, a significant discrepancy between the registered logo and the logo used in the marketplace can create an evidentiary problem.
For these reasons, word marks remain the cornerstone of most international trademark strategies. They are generally more durable than design marks and less susceptible to becoming outdated as branding evolves.
Before adopting or rolling out a redesigned logo in China—or, ideally, anywhere in the world—companies should consult trademark counsel to determine whether the revised logo remains within the scope of the existing registration or whether an additional application should be filed.
4. Maintain evidence of trademark use
Beginning in 2027, CNIPA will have authority to initiate certain non-use cancellation proceedings on its own initiative rather than waiting for a third party to act.
Exactly how frequently this authority will be exercised remains to be seen, and much will depend on how CNIPA implements the new provisions in practice.
Nevertheless, the practical lesson is straightforward: maintaining evidence of use is becoming increasingly important.
Advertising materials, invoices, product packaging, sales records, screenshots, shipping documents, and other contemporaneous evidence should be retained on an ongoing basis rather than reconstructed years later after a cancellation action has begun. It is surprisingly common for companies to have used their trademarks for years but remain unable to prove that use because they failed to preserve the necessary records.
China is not abandoning its first-to-file system. The revised law does, however, give the authorities more tools to scrutinize registrations that have no credible connection to actual or reasonably anticipated business activity. Maintaining organized evidence of legitimate trademark use will therefore become an increasingly important part of portfolio management.
5. Make sure your portfolio reflects your business
Many companies accumulate trademark registrations over time that no longer correspond to their commercial activities. At the same time, filing beyond a company’s immediate product line can serve legitimate purposes, including protecting reasonably anticipated expansion, addressing subclass issues, and preventing counterfeiters or competitors from exploiting gaps in coverage.
The revised law does not make defensive trademark registration categorically improper. It does, however, provide for the rejection of applications that are not intended for use and that clearly exceed the applicant’s normal production or business needs.
Companies should therefore be prepared to articulate a credible commercial, defensive, or expansion rationale for new filings. Applications that bear no reasonable relationship to the company’s existing or anticipated business may face greater scrutiny.
Existing registrations should also be reviewed periodically. Registrations that have not been used for three consecutive years may be vulnerable to cancellation, whether at the request of a third party or, under the revised law, through proceedings initiated by CNIPA.
A well-designed portfolio should therefore strike a balance. It should be broad enough to protect the company’s actual business, reasonably anticipated expansion, and legitimate defensive interests, but sufficiently focused that its scope can be explained and supported.
A Broader Push Against Trademark Abuse
The amendments also expand the general good-faith principle governing trademark registration and use. In addition to requiring trademark rights to be exercised in good faith, the law now expressly prohibits the abuse of trademark rights in a manner that harms national interests, the public interest, or the legitimate rights and interests of others.
Whether these provisions become significant enforcement tools remains to be seen. Much will depend on how broadly CNIPA and the courts interpret and apply them in practice. At a minimum, however, they reflect a continued legislative effort to discourage opportunistic trademark conduct throughout the life of a trademark, not merely at the filing stage.
The amendments also extend certain penalties applicable to China-based trademark agencies to misconduct occurring in connection with overseas trademark matters. We look forward to vigorous enforcement of these new provisions against the trademark filing mills that have clogged trademark registers around the world—including the USPTO—with bad-faith applications.
A Good Time for a Portfolio Audit
The amendments do not fundamentally change the importance of trademark registration in China. Filing early remains the single most important step foreign companies can take to protect their brands.
What the amendments do change is the importance of maintaining those registrations after they issue.
This is therefore an excellent opportunity to conduct a portfolio review. Brand owners should confirm that:
- registrant names, addresses, and other recorded information are current;
- registered logos still correspond to the marks being used;
- new filings have a credible commercial, defensive, or expansion rationale;
- evidence of trademark use is being retained on an ongoing basis;
- trademark-watch and internal decision-making procedures can accommodate the new two-month opposition period; and
- registrations adequately cover the goods and services that matter to the company’s current and reasonably anticipated business.
Many aspects of the revised law will become clearer only after implementing rules are issued and the authorities begin applying the new provisions. Until then, foreign brand owners should prepare for more active scrutiny rather than assume that these new powers will remain unused. Companies that review their portfolios now will be better positioned to respond as CNIPA’s enforcement practices develop.
