Suppose a foreign coffee brand discovers that another business has applied to register a similar name for kitchen appliances. Start by comparing the actual goods and the signs. If ordinary trademark grounds do not address the conflict, assess whether the facts support requesting well-known trademark protection in the dispute. Recognition is a finding made at a party’s request when needed to decide a case. Trademark Law, Articles 13–14
What the claim needs to establish
Under the current law, a mark well known but unregistered in China may be protected on identical or similar goods if copying, imitation or translation is likely to cause confusion. For dissimilar goods, the current law requires a well-known mark registered in China, copying, imitation or translation, a likelihood of misleading the public, and possible harm to the owner. A different class number alone does not establish that goods are dissimilar. Explain why the public would connect the other party’s mark with yours and how that connection could harm your interests. Current Trademark Law, Articles 13–14
The revised law takes effect on 1 January 2027. Article 21 removes the express China registration requirement from the dissimilar-goods provision. It retains the need to show that the public would be misled and the owner’s interests could be harmed. For a dispute spanning the changeover, check which law applies to the proceeding. Revised Trademark Law, Articles 21, 63 and 87
Build the evidence file around the relevant date
For an opposition or invalidation under the current recognition rules, work back from the filing date of the challenged mark. Identify the relevant public in China, which can include consumers, sellers and industry participants. Then organise the materials by what each exhibit proves. Rules on Recognition and Protection of Well-Known Trademarks, Articles 2 and 9
For those administrative proceedings, Article 9 calls for evidence of at least five years of use for an unregistered mark, or at least three years of registration or five years of continuous use for a registered mark. It also looks to recent three-year advertising and commercial records. In a civil infringement case, organise proof around whether the mark was already well known when the alleged conduct occurred. Recognition rules, Article 9 · Supreme People’s Court interpretation on well-known marks, Article 5
| What you need to show | Examples of records to collect |
|---|---|
| Who knew the mark in China | China sales by region and channel, reliable market-share data with the market defined, and independent coverage that reached the relevant audience. |
| Which mark people encountered | Dated packaging, ads and listings showing the exact mark claimed. Keep records for the foreign word mark and Chinese name separate unless the evidence establishes a connection. |
| How long and how widely the mark was promoted | Media contracts and invoices paired with dated ad samples, campaign dates, geography and actual reach where available. |
| Why the disputed use matters | The challenged application or use, the sales channels and audience overlap, and facts supporting an apparent connection or potential harm. |
| Prior protection | Relevant court or administrative decisions, including earlier recognition where applicable, with dates and the mark and goods identified. |
Put a short index at the front of the file. For each exhibit, identify the date, geography, mark, goods and proposition it supports. Break out mainland figures from global totals where possible. A worldwide revenue figure can give context, while China-specific evidence helps show what the relevant public knew before the disputed filing. Evidence factors under the current recognition rules · Overview of well-known trademark protection