The CNIPA Notice on Strengthening Trademark Use Management

On 21 November 2025, the Office of the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) released the Notice on Strengthening Trademark Use Management. The notice is addressed to various local Intellectual Property Administration authorities as an enforcement directive, aiming to strengthen the regulation of illegal and irregular trademark use, guide society to respect and properly exercise the exclusive rights to trademarks, promote fair competition and advance high-quality development. 

The notice identifies several priority areas for enforcement. Of particular concern is the use of deceptive and other prohibited unregistered trademarks. The CNIPA emphasised particular attention to cases where unregistered marks contain terms such as ‘exclusive supply’, ‘special supply’, ‘premium’, or ‘national’, which may mislead the public regarding the supply channels or quality of goods; where unregistered marks include expressions such as ‘selenium-rich’, ‘organic’, ‘additive-free’, or ‘100%’, but the actual characteristics of the goods do not correspond to such claims, thereby misleading the public regarding the main raw materials or ingredients; and where unregistered marks feature place names, years, or terms such as ‘handmade’ or ‘hand-beaten’, causing the public to misperceive the origin, production time, or manufacturing process of the goods. With respect to misleading use of registered trademarks, the CNIPA requires focused attention on situations where registered marks are combined with product names, advertising slogans, or packaging and decoration in ways that mislead the public about product quality, origin, or manufacturing process; as well as cases where registration particulars are altered without authorisation, resulting in public misunderstanding of product characteristics or quality, or where such alterations are made to improperly associate with another party’s trademark. Other enforcement priorities include the deceptive practice of labelling unregistered marks as registered, failure to use registered trademarks where required - particularly in the tobacco sector and emerging products such as e‑cigarettes; improper use of “well‑known trademark” designations in advertising and commercial activities, non‑compliant use of collective or certification marks to goods that do not meet prescribed quality standards, and misconduct by trademark agencies, such as handling malicious registration applications or abusive non‑use cancellation actions that undermine the interests of legitimate rights holders.

With respect to implementation measures, the CNIPA also highlights the need to keep reporting channels open, strengthen inter‑departmental coordination, enhance routine supervision and public opinion monitoring, and focus on areas closely related to people’s livelihoods such as food and medicine, children’s toys, and household appliances. It calls for the timely detection and handling of clues of illegal and non-compliant trademark use, as well as stronger guidance on integrity and compliance. The notice further encourages fostering a sound social atmosphere in which the exclusive rights to trademarks are respected and properly exercised.

It is widely known that in recent years, the CNIPA has tightened the application of absolute grounds in trademark examination, and rejections on the grounds of marks being considered deceptive have become more frequent than in the past. This has raised concerns about the practical risks of using a mark that has been rejected on grounds of deceptiveness. In fact, CNIPA had already signalled its position in the Work Plan for Systematic Governance of Malicious Trademark Registration and Promotion of High‑Quality Development (2023–2025), released on 8 May 2023, in which it stated that it would ‘strengthen the follow‑up and handling of trademark applications rejected under prohibition clauses, and strictly investigate and punish those who knowingly continue to use such marks in violation of the law.’ Therefore, CNIPA’s stance on regulating the use of deceptive marks is consistent, and the issuance of this latest notice further demonstrates the integration of trademark examination with market use management. The practical implementation of this notice will be worth close attention.