The China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has revised its guidelines governing three-year non-use cancellation procedures for registered trademarks. This update introduces stricter evidentiary standards for petitioners challenging inactive trademarks. Previously, minimal search results - often limited to a few pages of general search-engine outputs - were sufficient to demonstrate non-use. Platforms such as Baidu.com or Bing.com were frequently cited, with no formal restrictions on search terms or platform coverage. The revised framework reflects a heightened level of scrutiny by the Chinese Trademark Office (TMO).
Recent enforcement actions indicate the TMO is now requiring more comprehensive proof of non-use. Petitioners must submit additional search data and investigative findings to validate their claims. While the Updated Guidelines outline acceptable preliminary evidence, they do not establish a formal protocol for investigations. Legal practitioners must adjust their strategies to align with evolving expectations.
To comply with the TMO’s standards, consider the following measures:
- Perform extensive searches across major Chinese platforms, including e-commerce sites like JD.com, Taobao.com, and social media channels such as WeChat and Douyin/TikTok.
- Refine searches to specific goods or services. For example, use targeted keywords like “trademark + clothing” or “trademark + shoes” to identify relevant listings.
- Investigate the registrant’s business connections. If the registrant is an individual, examine affiliated companies or entities that may utilize the mark.
- For device marks or visual elements, employ AI-assisted image searches to detect potential use or design similarities.
- If the petitioner and registrant share the same city, prepare detailed on-site investigation reports.
The TMO is also requesting petitioners to justify their cancellation rationale and verify the accuracy of submitted materials. These additional requirements have significantly elevated the initial evidentiary burden.
The revisions likely stem from concerns over the misuse of non-use cancellation procedures. Stricter trademark examination practices have complicated challenges through dissimilarity arguments or consent arrangements. This has led some applicants to rely on non-use cancellations as a final option.
China’s trademark system operates on a first-to-file basis, without a requirement for actual use. As a result, many registered marks remain unused. While the new standards may discourage abusive filings, they are unlikely to block legitimate cases. However, the increased time and cost of thorough investigations could deter opportunistic claims.
Businesses must proactively monitor trademarks to stay ahead of these changes. The risk of conflicts or confusable registrations rises as more brands expand into global markets. A robust monitoring strategy enables early identification of potential threats, reducing the likelihood of costly legal disputes.
Understanding confusability risks and maintaining detailed records will be critical in navigating this evolving landscape. Staying informed about examiner trends and preparing for shifts in enforcement priorities is essential. With the right tools, businesses can protect their trademarks effectively without relying on outdated methods or guesswork.