Countdown: 145 Days: 6 Things Enterprises Must Complete Before the New Trademark Law Takes Effect

August 12, 2026 · IP Law · Aipunajie Patent Firm / Mili Law Firm

There are 145 days left until January 1, 2027. On that day, the newly revised Trademark Law will officially take effect—your unused trademarks may be directly revoked by the authorities, your "ancient method handmade" promotional language may incur a fine of RMB 250,000, and your defensive trademark portfolio may be challenged for invalidation by anyone. And you may not have prepared anything at all.

This is the first comprehensive revision of the Trademark Law since its enactment in 1982: expanding from 8 chapters and 73 articles to 9 chapters and 87 articles, with a new chapter on "Conditions for Trademark Registration." The transition window left for enterprises is now less than 5 months.

What Has Changed? 8 Core Changes—These 3 Are the Most Critical

Let's start with the big picture. There are many changes in the new law; let's quickly run through them:

| # | Change | One-Sentence Impact |

|---|---------|-----------|

| 1 | "Not for the purpose of use, clearly exceeding normal production and operation needs" will not be registered (Article 19) | The path for batch defensive trademark registration narrows |

| 2 | The above circumstance is listed as a ground for invalidation of registered trademarks, which may be raised by any person (Article 50) | Existing trademarks may face "retrospective review" |

| 3 | The opposition period is shortened from 3 months to 2 months (Article 36) | Monitoring response must accelerate by one-third |

| 4 | The authorities may proactively revoke trademarks for non-use on their own initiative (Article 57, Paragraph 3) | The logic of "no one challenges = safe" is invalidated |

| 5 | Internet use is included in the law for the first time as a form of trademark use (Article 2, Paragraph 3) | E-commerce/livestreaming/social media records become statutory evidence |

| 6 | The one-year isolation protection period applies only to "voluntary cancellation" (Article 49) | Voluntarily cancelling unused trademarks provides 1 more year of protection than letting them lapse |

| 7 | Misleading use may incur fines + cancellation of registration (Article 56) | Descriptions such as "ancient method," "handmade," and "original pulp" may directly become non-compliant |

| 8 | If a licensee fails to fulfill quality obligations, the licensor may terminate the contract (Article 55) | Brand franchise systems need supplementary contract clauses |

Among the 8 changes, Article 4 (ex officio revocation for non-use), Article 7 (penalties for misleading use), and Article 2 (invalidation of registered trademarks) are the "hidden bombs" most easily overlooked by enterprises. The key point is: it's not about what you did wrong—it's about what you failed to do that could put your trademarks at risk.

A Look at the Data

In 2025, China saw 4.206 million trademark registrations, a year-on-year decrease of 12%—registration growth is slowing. However, as of the end of 2025, the total number of valid registered trademarks reached 53.032 million, an increase of more than 3 million compared to 2024.

Meanwhile, applications for revocation of trademarks for three years of non-use surged from 56,000 in 2017 to 229,000 in 2024—quadrupling in 4 years. The era of "evidence speaks" has arrived. Article 57, Paragraph 3 of the new law further grants the authorities the power to "proactively revoke"—if your trademark cannot produce 3 years of use evidence, the authorities can revoke it without anyone filing a complaint.

145-Day Countdown: 6 Things to Do, Prioritized by Timeline

Below is not a legal provision-by-provision explanation of "what changed," but rather a timeline telling you "what to do now."

First: By end of September—Comprehensive Trademark Portfolio Review

Compile a complete list of all company trademarks and categorize them into the following three types:

Core trademarks: Trademarks actually used on main products/services. Ensure complete use evidence for these (see the third item below).
Defensive trademarks: Similar trademarks registered to protect core trademarks but never actually used. These are high-risk—the "exceeding normal production and operation needs" standard under Article 19 of the new law escalates scrutiny of defensive registrations. Recommendation: Prepare a "Business Relevance Statement" for each defensive trademark, explaining its logical connection to the core business (protection radius, industry characteristics, brand planning), to pre-position defense materials for potential examination/invalidation proceedings.
Unused trademarks: Trademarks completely unrelated to current business. See the second item below.

King & Wood Mallesons' compliance guide published in July proposed the concept of "trademark portfolio review," but our recommendation is more direct: the review is not for archiving—it's for decision-making. After completing the three-category classification, each category has clear next steps.

Second: By end of October—"Keep or Cancel" Decision for Unused Trademarks

Article 49 of the new law tightens the one-year isolation protection period: only "voluntary cancellation" qualifies for the protection of prohibiting others from registering identical or similar trademarks within 1 year. Allowing the trademark to lapse naturally (non-renewal) does not qualify, nor does cancellation due to revocation for non-use.

This means: voluntary cancellation provides 1 more year of protection than letting the trademark die naturally.

If your unused trademarks have the following characteristics, it is recommended to voluntarily cancel them before the end of October:

Unrelated to current business direction, with no plan for use within 3 years
Objectively at risk of being challenged for revocation for non-use (3 years of non-use)
Cancellation has no material impact on business layout

Conversely, if there are unused trademarks that may be used in the future, immediately put them into "use preparation" status—even a small-scale internal use should leave traceable evidence (refer to the third item).

Third: From Now On—Routine Documentation of Use Evidence

Article 2, Paragraph 3 of the new law clarifies for the first time: internet use constitutes trademark use. The significance is that e-commerce backend transaction records, livestreaming sales videos, social media promotional posts, and mini-program pages—evidence that may not have been recognized in revocation proceedings before—are now written into the law.

From now on, establish a simple "use evidence ledger":

| Evidence Type | Content to Preserve | Preservation Frequency |

|---------|---------|---------|

| Sales contracts | Scanned first page + signature page of contracts containing the trademark | Per transaction |

| Invoices | Invoices containing the trademark name | Monthly archiving |

| E-commerce backend | Product links + transaction record screenshots + backend data exports | Quarterly |

| Livestreaming/short video | Livestream recordings + video links + publication dates | Per campaign |

| Advertising | Placement contracts + advertising materials + publication screenshots | Per placement |

| Exhibitions | Booth photos + exhibition contracts + promotional materials | Per exhibition |

It doesn't need to be complicated. The core logic is: for each trademark, be able to produce at least 3 different types of use evidence per year.

Fourth: By end of November—Self-Audit for Misleading Use

Article 56 of the new law is a new weapon: misleading use of trademarks triggers an order to rectify; if not rectified—where business turnover is RMB 50,000 or more, a fine of up to 5 times the turnover; where less than RMB 50,000, a fine of up to RMB 250,000. Ultimately, the registration may also be cancelled.

What constitutes "misleading use"? In simple terms, it means the trademark itself or its manner of use causes the public to misunderstand the quality, raw materials, function, place of origin, etc. of the goods.

Several high-risk self-check points:

Packaging/promotional materials containing absolute or suggestive descriptions such as "ancient method," "handmade," "original pulp," "pure natural"
Trademark wording suggesting a place of origin that does not match the actual origin (e.g., bearing "Jingdezhen" but not produced in Jingdezhen)
Efficacy descriptions in e-commerce product detail pages exceeding the product's actual functions
Exaggerated claims in livestreaming scripts

It is recommended that each business line (marketing, e-commerce operations, livestreaming team) complete a round of copy review before the end of November. This is not just a trademark law issue—misleading promotion itself violates Article 8 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (false advertising). Our experience at Najie IP in handling such cross-compliance cases is: a single piece of copy may simultaneously trigger penalty provisions under two or three laws; without early self-audit, the cost doubles.

Fifth: Immediately—Accelerate Opposition Monitoring

The opposition period has been shortened from 3 months to 2 months, cutting a full one-third. Previously, discovering a similar trademark gave you 3 months to file an opposition—relatively ample time. Now you only have 2 months, approximately 40-45 working days, including: monitoring discovery → internal assessment → decision on whether to oppose → evidence preparation → drafting the opposition brief → submission. For many enterprises, these 45 days pass in the blink of an eye.

Three recommended actions:

1. Purchase external monitoring services or integrate automated monitoring tools: Manual review of trademark gazettes cannot keep pace with the 2-month rhythm

2. Front-load the internal approval process: Clarify in advance "which trademark classes/wording of similar trademarks must be opposed" to reduce internal back-and-forth

3. Pre-prepare opposition evidence: Prepare use evidence packages for core trademarks in advance (reputation evidence, advertising data, sales data), ready for immediate use when needed

Sixth: By end of December—Supplement License/Franchise Contract Clauses

Article 55 of the new law adds a new right of contract termination for licensors: if a licensee fails to fulfill quality assurance obligations, the licensor may terminate the license contract.

Brand licensors and franchise systems need to do two things:

1. Add "quality assurance obligation" clauses: Clearly define quality standards, acceptance methods, and consequences of breach

2. Add "statutory termination right" clauses: Enumerate licensee breach scenarios and termination consequences (security deposit handling, transition period arrangements, inventory clearance, etc.)

The law itself provides for "may terminate," but there are no post-termination handling rules—these must be supplemented through contractual provisions.

Printable Checklist (For Corporate IPR/Management Direct Use)

|------|:--:|------|---------|

---

The core change of the new Trademark Law can be summarized in one sentence: a shift from "protection at the registration stage" to "protection at the use stage." Trademarks are no longer assets that you "register and file away in a drawer"—they have become projects requiring continuous management.

King & Wood Mallesons characterized the logic of the new law as a shift from "registration" to "use." We would add: in this shift, doing nothing is the greatest risk. The new law grants the authorities the power to revoke trademarks for non-use ex officio, provides a channel for any person to file invalidation, and arms regulators with the weapon of direct fines for misleading use. The 5-month window is not for you to wait for the implementing regulations—it's for you to act now.

In our next article, we'll discuss the special challenges the new law poses for small and medium-sized enterprises: without a legal department or dedicated trademark personnel, how can you complete a self-audit in 3 hours? Follow 「纳杰觅理」 to stay updated.

---

Landline: 010-65150974 | Mobile: 15321374076

Email: [email protected] | WeChat: najieip

He Zigang | Intellectual Property Attorney | Beijing Najie Intellectual Property

*This article represents only the author's personal views and does not constitute legal advice. For specific case analysis, please feel free to contact us.*

*The implementing regulations cited in this article have not yet been officially published; specific implementation details are subject to the final published implementing regulations.*

This is a machine-translated version of our Chinese original article for reference. The Chinese version is the authoritative source.