China's Trademark Law Amendment: A systematic improvement

With China’s amended Trademark Law set to take effect on January 1, 2027, significant shifts are on the horizon for brand protection and enforcement, explains Jun LI of the CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office.

China’s Trademark Law was amended on June 26, 2026, and will take effect on January 1, 2027. The amendment brings changes in what can be registered, how to stop bad-faith filings, rights balance, and procedures.

These changes respond to the digital economy and long-standing judicial disputes. The following thirteen key points introduce its scope and effect.

Dynamic marks can now be registered

The new law allows "dynamic marks"—such as startup animations, software logos, and movie title sequences—to embrace new forms of digital brand expression.

Better coordination across laws and departments

The registration and use of national park marks, Olympic symbols, and special signs must follow both the Trademark Law and other relevant laws. Several provisions also improve coordination between administrative enforcement and criminal justice.

A catch-all rule against bad-faith application

Anyone may oppose or seek to invalidate applications that are clearly beyond normal business needs or that disrupt the registration system or harm public interests. This shows the trademark office's strong commitment to stopping bad faith at the start.

Full-chain penalties for bad-faith acts

Penalties apply throughout the whole process—from filing, administrative review to court cases. They cover bad-faith applicants, non-compliant agencies, and individual attorneys. Penalties include fines, warnings, and civil damages, creating a strong deterrent.

The office may cancel marks ex officio

The trademark office may cancel registered marks that have become generic names, have not been used for three years without justifiable reason, or are used in a misleading way. A new reporting column on the CNIPA website allows the public to report misleading use marks.

Shorter opposition period

The time to oppose a published mark is cut from three months to two months, helping applicants get their rights sooner. Opponents should act quickly within this shorter period.

Suspension of cases now allowed in opposition proceedings. 

If the decision on prior rights depends on the outcome of another pending court or administrative case, the opposition may be paused to avoid wasted effort and inconsistent decisions.

Restriction period greatly reduced.

The one-year restriction on registration of same or similar marks by others now applies only to marks that were voluntarily cancelled and no longer applies to marks that are cancelled due to non-use, invalidated, or not renewed. This reflects a practical approach to marks that no longer have legal protection or market presence.

Stronger protection for well-known marks

Even without registration, well-known marks can now also enjoy protection against use on unrelated goods or services. In addition, in unfair competition investigations, the right holder may also ask for a well-known status finding at the same time.

Protection now covers 'prior Interests'

The law now protects not only "prior rights" but also "prior interests," including titles of well-known works, character names, and distinctive names of well-known products, etc. This gives clearer legal support to those interests holders.

Licensors have a statutory right to end the licence. 

Even without a specific clause in the contract, a licensor may end the licence if the licensee fails to meet quality-control duties.

Nominative use is allowed as fair use, but confusion must be avoided.

Beyond descriptive use, functional use, and prior-use defences, the new law makes it clear that "nominative use" is a kind of fair use, as long as the user clearly avoids any risk of consumer confusion.

A clear starting point for the three-year non-use defence.

Courts previously diverged on whether to count three years backwards from the date of the lawsuit or from the date of the infringing act. The amendment now sets "the date of the infringing act" as the uniform starting point, making court decisions more predictable.

For brand owners and agencies, these changes mean faster rights and clearer rules, restoring trademarks to their core role of indicating source and carrying goodwill. This presents both challenges and opportunities for all involved. Your feedback and contributions to the discussion are most welcome.

Jun LI is a senior Trademark Agent handling trademark prosecution and litigation cases at CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office.