Chinese court upholds bad-faith trademark finding based on excessive filings

A Chinese court has upheld a finding of bad-faith trademark registration against an advertising company, citing a portfolio of applications that exceeded its business needs and insufficient evidence of genuine commercial use.

A Chinese court has upheld a finding that an advertising company registered a trademark in bad faith, highlighting how an applicant’s wider filing activity and lack of evidence supporting genuine commercial use can influence the assessment of its intentions.

The ruling, reported by MLex on November 2, concerned an applicant whose trademark filings reportedly exceeded its normal business requirements. The court also considered the insufficient evidence of commercial use when upholding the bad-faith finding.

The decision reinforces China’s efforts to address excessive trademark registrations and applications made without a genuine intention to use the marks. It also highlights the importance of examining an applicant’s broader commercial activities when assessing whether its filing strategy has a legitimate business purpose. The applicant’s identity, the disputed mark and the court’s full reasoning have not been independently confirmed from the published judgment.

China’s approach to bad-faith filings

Under Article 4 of China’s current Trademark Law, applications for trademark registration made in bad faith and without an intention to use are subject to refusal.

The China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has provided further guidance on how this provision should be interpreted. Its guidance identifies excessive filing volumes, applications that clearly exceed normal business requirements, and a lack of genuine intent to use as relevant indicators of bad-faith registration.

Importantly, the assessment is not based solely on the number of applications filed. Authorities may also consider the applicant’s business activities, the goods and services covered by the applications, the relationship between the marks and its commercial operations, and whether there is a realistic prospect of use.

Nor is actual commercial use necessarily required at the point of filing. Legitimate applications may cover planned business expansion or reasonable defensive protection, provided the filing strategy has a credible commercial rationale. The reported judgment illustrates the importance of assessing trademark applications in their wider commercial context rather than treating each registration as an isolated matter.

Implications for international brand owners

The decision is relevant to international businesses seeking to protect their trademarks in China, where excessive filings and trademark hoarding can create obstacles to securing and maintaining brand protection.

However, the distinction between systematic applications made without an intention to use and conventional trademark squatting remains important. The former concerns the improper accumulation of trademark rights, while the latter commonly involves attempts to register marks associated with other businesses or established brands.

For international brand owners, the ruling underlines the importance of monitoring third-party filing activity and maintaining evidence of prior rights, commercial use, and legitimate brand development plans.

It also comes ahead of significant changes to China’s trademark framework. The country’s revised Trademark Law, adopted in June 2026, is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2027. The amendments will further address applications made without an intention to use and those exceeding normal business needs, while strengthening the consequences for bad-faith filing activity.

The full significance of the latest ruling will depend on the court’s detailed reasoning, particularly how it assessed the applicant’s filing history, commercial activities and evidence of use. Nevertheless, it provides a timely reminder that trademark portfolio management in China must be supported by genuine commercial objectives.

← Back to News