CHINA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Qiang Ma, Yi Xu and Lei Wu, Jingtian & Gongcheng
Jingtian & Gongcheng 34th Floor, Tower 3 China Central Place
77 Jianguo Road Chaoyang District Beijing 100025 China
Tel: +86 139 1023 5008 Fax: +86 10 5809 1100 Email: ma.qiang@jingtian.com Web: www.jingtian.com
Current Practices of Trade Mark Prosecution In 2025, China’s trade mark prosecution practice shows a stricter examination trend, reflected in the following. Rejection of suggestive trade marks by CNIPA under Articles 10 and 11 of PRC Trademark Law The concept of suggestive trade marks originated in the United States and has since gained international acceptance. These trade marks allow for an indi - rect association with designated goods or services through implication and imagination. As a result, they are considered inherently distinctive and can be reg - istered without the need to prove “secondary mean - ing” acquired through use. In China, while the term “suggestive trade marks” is not explicitly articulated within the PRC trade mark laws, the examination of such trade marks has shown some leniency in prac - tice for years. However, from 2022 to 2025, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has adopted a progressively stricter stance. The CNIPA often finds that the designated goods do not necessarily align with the mark’s suggestive elements, leading to a classification of the mark as deceptive or misleading under Article 10.1.7 of the PRC Trademark Law. Alternatively, it may determine that the suggestive elements are, in fact, direct repre - sentations of certain characteristics of the designated goods, concluding that the mark merely has direct rel - evance to the goods or services as outlined in Article 11 of the PRC Trademark Law.
The recent trademark rejections of “Lab.it” for cos - metics and “AKKKING” for nutritional products, both suggestive marks, highlight growing concerns about distinctiveness and potential misleading implications under trade mark law. Suggestive trade marks, which can create indirect associations in consumers’ minds regarding product characteristics, are traditionally favourable in competitive markets. However, the cur - rent stringent examination processes present signifi - cant hurdles for businesses aiming to register such trade marks. Trade marks denied under Article 10 of the Trademark Law face twofold challenges. First, their registration and usage are forbidden, which could lead to legal repercussions for businesses that continue to use them without registration. This involves the height - ened risk of oversight and sanctions from local trade mark authorities, which enforce compliance through existing laws and regulations. Secondly, entities using refused trade marks find themselves in a precarious position regarding protection against infringement. Due to the Supreme People’s Court judicial interpre - tations, trade marks rejected under Article 10 cannot claim protection as an unregistered trade mark under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. Consequently, busi - nesses are left without the means to seek recourse or assert their rights when facing unfair competition, significantly limiting their ability to defend their brand identity in the marketplace. When registering trade marks, both Chinese and for - eign enterprises should exercise caution throughout
81 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook