- China is a first-to-file trademark jurisdiction: whoever registers first generally owns the mark, regardless of who used it first abroad — which is exactly why bad-faith squatting (恶意抢注) hits foreign brands hard.
中国实行商标注册在先原则：一般谁先注册谁拥有商标，与谁在境外先使用无关——这正是恶意抢注对外国品牌打击尤重的原因。- The single most important defensive step is to register early and broadly: file in China (directly or via the Madrid System) across the relevant classes and defensive subclasses before you enter or even discuss the market.
最重要的防御动作是尽早、全面注册：在进入市场（甚至公开洽谈）之前，就在中国（直接申请或经马德里体系）在相关类别与防御性小类布局注册。- Chinese law already gives foreign owners tools to fight squatting: opposition (异议), invalidation (无效宣告), non-use cancellation after three years (撤三), and bad-faith grounds under Articles 4, 13, 15 and 32 of the Trademark Law.
现行法已为外国权利人提供反抢注工具：异议、无效宣告、连续三年不使用撤销（撤三），以及《商标法》第 4、13、15、32 条下的恶意事由。- Enforcement is intensifying: CNIPA’s 2023–2025 special campaign against bad-faith registration handled over 200,000 cases in each recent half-year, using fast rejection, ex-officio invalidation and agency crackdowns.
执法持续加码：国家知识产权局 2023–2025 年系统治理专项行动，近年每半年打击恶意注册均超 20 万件，运用快速驳回、依职权宣告无效与代理机构整治。- A comprehensive Trademark Law revision is advancing through the NPC (draft 2025–2026): it reframes the “no genuine intent to use” bar as “clearly exceeding normal business needs,” and introduces a compulsory-transfer remedy so a wronged owner can obtain the squatted mark directly.
一部全面的《商标法》修订正在全国人大推进（2025–2026 草案）：将”无真实使用意图”门槛重构为”明显超出正常生产经营需要”，并引入强制转移制度，使被侵害的权利人可直接取得被抢注商标。- The draft also strengthens protection for well-known marks, curbs bad-faith litigation, tightens agency supervision (fines raised to ¥100,000–200,000), and addresses overseas squatting of Chinese brands.
草案还强化驰名商标保护、遏制恶意诉讼、收紧代理监管（罚款升至 10 万–20 万元），并回应境外对中国品牌的抢注。- Practical playbook: register first, monitor the register, oppose early, invalidate or cancel squatters, keep dated evidence of use and reputation, and use administrative + judicial routes together.
实操打法：先注册、盯监测、早异议、对抢注者提无效或撤三、留存带日期的使用与声誉证据，并行政与司法两条路径并用。
Bad-Faith Trademark Squatting in China: how foreign brands prevent and reclaim their marks | 中国的商标恶意抢注：外国品牌如何预防与夺回商标
Overview
Few surprises are as unwelcome for a foreign brand as discovering that its name or logo is already registered in China — by someone else. Because China is a first-to-file jurisdiction, priority generally goes to whoever registers first, not to whoever used the mark first abroad. That structural feature, combined with a large market and low filing costs, has fuelled bad-faith trademark squatting (恶意抢注) and hoarding (囤积) for decades.
The picture is improving. China’s IP authority has run a multi-year crackdown, the courts and CNIPA are more willing to find bad faith, and a comprehensive revision of the Trademark Law is now moving through the National People’s Congress with tools squarely aimed at squatters. This guide explains how squatting works, the defensive and offensive tools available today, and what the coming reform will change — grounded in the Trademark Law, CNIPA’s governance plan, and the NPC revision draft.
Why squatting happens: first-to-file
China grants trademark rights on registration, not prior use (subject to narrow exceptions for well-known and prior-used marks). For a foreign company, this means:
- A local party can register your brand before you do — then block your entry, force you to buy the mark back, or sue you for “infringing” your own name.
- Common patterns include: grabbing well-known signs (brand names, personalities, place names, cultural symbols); large-scale hoarding across many classes with no intent to use; free-riding with near-identical marks (added strokes, changed radicals, subtle letter tweaks); and agencies helping applicants register “zombie” marks for profit.
Defensive step one: register early and broadly
The cheapest cure is prevention. Before you enter — or even publicly discuss — the China market:
- File first. Apply in China directly through CNIPA, or via the Madrid System designating China. Do it before trade shows, distributor talks, or press.
- Cover the right classes. File in your core classes and defensive subclasses/related classes, plus a Chinese-language version of your mark (transliteration and/or meaningful translation) — squatters often grab the Chinese name.
- Register key sub-brands, logos and slogans, not just the house mark.
- Watch the register. Use monitoring to catch look-alike or identical filings early, when opposition is cheapest.
Offensive tools available today
Even without the reform, the Trademark Law provides real remedies against squatters:
- Opposition (异议): challenge a published application within the statutory window, e.g., on bad-faith or prior-rights grounds.
- Invalidation (无效宣告): seek to cancel a registered mark that violates the law — including Article 13 (well-known marks), Article 15 (marks grabbed by agents/representatives or those with a contractual/business relationship), and Article 32 (pre-emption of another’s prior-used mark with some reputation, or infringement of prior rights).
- “No genuine intent to use” bar: applications not filed to use the mark and made in bad faith can be refused.
- Non-use cancellation (“撤三”): cancel a registered mark that has not been genuinely used for three consecutive years — a powerful way to clear a hoarded, unused squat.
- Bad-faith litigation defence: courts increasingly reject abusive infringement suits brought by squatters.
Use administrative and judicial routes together: CNIPA proceedings (opposition/invalidation/cancellation) plus, where needed, court action.
Enforcement is intensifying
CNIPA has treated bad-faith registration as a systemic risk. Under its Work Plan for the Systematic Governance of Bad-Faith Trademark Registration (2023–2025), the authority combines fast rejection, ex-officio invalidation of marks with major adverse impact, watch-lists for repeat hoarders, batched examination of no-intent-to-use filings, and a crackdown on offending agencies. Publicly reported figures show China handling over 200,000 bad-faith cases in recent half-year periods — a scale that has begun to shift filer behaviour.
What the coming reform will change
A comprehensive Trademark Law revision — the first full rewrite (the current law dates to 1983 with four amendments) — is advancing through the NPC (draft discussed at NPC Standing Committee sessions in 2025–2026). Key changes relevant to foreign brands:
- Sharper bad-faith bar. The draft reframes Article 4’s “no intent to use” language as “not for the purpose of use and clearly exceeding normal production and business needs,” giving examiners a clearer standard to reject hoarders.
- Compulsory transfer remedy. Where an agent or representative squats a principal’s mark, the rightful owner may obtain the mark directly through invalidation, instead of the slower “oppose then re-file” path — a faster route to reclaiming a stolen brand.
- Stronger use-orientation. Reinforced exit mechanisms (cancellation of marks that become generic or go unused for three years) push “register-and-use,” not “register-and-sit.”
- Well-known mark protection and overseas squatting. The draft strengthens protection for well-known marks and addresses squatting of Chinese brands abroad, while extending trademark-use concepts to online/social/metaverse contexts.
- Agency discipline. Tighter record-filing and conduct rules for agencies, with fines for violations raised to ¥100,000–200,000, and curbs on agencies setting up shell entities to file marks.
- Curbing abusive enforcement. Provisions target over-enforcement and bad-faith litigation by registrants.
Until the revision is enacted and in force, the current law and CNIPA campaign remain the operative framework — but the direction of travel is clearly more protective of genuine brand owners.
What to do next
- File in China now — core classes, defensive classes, and a Chinese-language mark — before market entry or public discussion.
- Search the register for existing identical/similar marks; if a squat exists, assess opposition/invalidation/撤三.
- Monitor continuously and oppose look-alikes early.
- Preserve evidence of your prior use, reputation, and any relationship with a suspected squatter (Articles 15/32/13 grounds).
- Combine routes: administrative action at CNIPA plus court proceedings where needed.
- Vet your agents — use reputable, properly filed trademark agencies.
- Track the Trademark Law revision and be ready to use the compulsory-transfer remedy once available.
Sources
- Trademark Law of the PRC (current, 1983 with subsequent amendments) and the Provisions on Regulating Trademark Application and Registration — China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA): www.cnipa.gov.cn.
- Work Plan for the Systematic Governance of Bad-Faith Trademark Registration to Promote High-Quality Development (2023–2025) — CNIPA: www.cnipa.gov.cn.
- Explanation on the Trademark Law (Revision Draft) and NPC coverage of the draft (2025–2026) — National People’s Congress: www.npc.gov.cn; CNIPA feature on the revised Trademark Law (2026): www.cnipa.gov.cn.
- Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks (WIPO) as a filing route designating China — CNIPA international registration pages: www.cnipa.gov.cn.
Related reading
- Trademark registration for foreign brands
- Patent protection & IP enforcement
- Customs Recordal & Border IP Protection in China
中国的商标恶意抢注：外国品牌如何预防与夺回商标
概述
对外国品牌而言，很少有比”发现自己的名称或标识在中国已被他人注册”更不受欢迎的意外了。由于中国实行注册在先原则，优先权一般归先注册者，而非先在境外使用者。这一结构性特征，叠加庞大市场与低廉申请成本，几十年来助长了商标恶意抢注与囤积。
情况正在好转。中国知识产权主管部门开展了多年打击，法院与国家知识产权局更愿意认定恶意，一部全面修订的《商标法》正在全国人大推进，其工具直指抢注者。本指南依据《商标法》、国家知识产权局治理方案及全国人大修订草案，讲解抢注如何发生、当下可用的防御与进攻工具，以及即将到来的改革将改变什么。
抢注为何发生：注册在先
中国以注册（而非在先使用）授予商标权（对驰名商标与在先使用者有狭窄例外）。对外国公司而言，这意味着：
- 本地方可以在你之前注册你的品牌——进而阻断你进入、迫使你回购商标，或以”侵权”起诉你使用自己的名称。
- 常见模式包括：抢注知名标识（品牌名、名人、地名、文化符号）；无使用意图的大规模跨类囤积；以近似标识傍名牌搭便车（增减笔画、更换偏旁、细微改动字母）；以及代理机构协助申请人注册牟利的”僵尸商标”。
防御第一步：尽早、全面注册
最经济的解药是预防。在进入——甚至公开洽谈——中国市场之前：
- 抢先申请。 通过国家知识产权局直接申请，或经马德里体系指定中国。务必赶在展会、经销洽谈或新闻发布之前。
- 覆盖正确类别。 在核心类别与防御性小类/关联类别布局，并注册商标的中文版本（音译和/或意译）——抢注者常抢注中文名。
- 注册关键子品牌、标识与口号，而非仅注册主商标。
- 监测商标注册。 借助监测尽早发现近似或相同申请，此时异议成本最低。
当下可用的进攻工具
即便没有修法，《商标法》也提供了对抗抢注的实在救济：
- 异议： 在法定期限内对已公告申请提出挑战，如以恶意或在先权利为由。
- 无效宣告： 请求撤销违法注册商标——包括第 13 条（驰名商标）、第 15 条（代理人/代表人或有合同/业务关系者抢注）、第 32 条（抢注他人已使用并有一定影响的商标，或损害在先权利）。
- “无真实使用意图”门槛（第 4 条）： 不以使用为目的且属恶意的申请可被驳回。
- 连续三年不使用撤销（”撤三”）： 撤销连续三年未真实使用的注册商标——清除囤积、闲置抢注的有力手段。
- 恶意诉讼抗辩： 法院日益驳回抢注者提起的滥用性侵权之诉。
行政与司法两条路径并用：国家知识产权局程序（异议/无效/撤销）加上必要时的诉讼。
执法持续加码
国家知识产权局将恶意注册视为系统性风险。依其《系统治理商标恶意注册促进高质量发展工作方案（2023—2025 年）》，主管部门综合运用快速驳回、对重大不良影响商标依职权宣告无效、对重复囤积者建立监控名录、对无使用意图申请批量审查，以及对违规代理机构整治。公开数据显示，近年每半年打击恶意注册均超 20 万件——这一规模已开始改变申请人行为。
即将到来的改革将改变什么
一部全面修订的《商标法》——首次全面重写（现行法始于 1983 年，历经四次修正）——正在全国人大推进（草案已于 2025–2026 年全国人大常委会会议审议）。与外国品牌相关的关键变化：
- 更锋利的恶意门槛。 草案将第 4 条”不以使用为目的”表述重构为“不以使用为目的，且明显超出正常生产经营需要”，为审查员提供更清晰的驳回囤积者标准。
- 强制转移制度。 代理人或代表人抢注被代理人商标的，权利人可通过无效宣告直接取得商标权，取代较慢的”异议再申请”路径——夺回被盗品牌的更快通道。
- 强化使用导向。 加强退出机制（撤销成为通用名称或连续三年不使用的商标），推动”注册即用”而非”注册闲置”。
- 驰名商标保护与境外抢注。 草案强化驰名商标保护，回应中国品牌在境外被抢注问题，并将商标使用概念延伸至网络/社交/元宇宙场景。
- 代理监管。 收紧代理机构备案与执业规则，违法罚款升至 10 万–20 万元，并遏制代理机构借新设主体变相申请。
- 遏制滥用维权。 针对注册人过度维权与恶意诉讼作出规定。
在修订生效前，现行法律与国家知识产权局专项行动仍是可操作框架——但趋势明显更利于真正的品牌权利人。
下一步建议
- 现在就在中国申请——核心类别、防御类别及中文商标——赶在市场进入或公开洽谈之前。
- 检索商标注册库中已有的相同/近似商标；若存在抢注，评估异议/无效/撤三。
- 持续监测并尽早对近似标识提异议。
- 保存证据：在先使用、声誉，以及与疑似抢注者的任何关系（第 15/32/13 条事由）。
- 路径并用： 国家知识产权局行政程序加必要时的诉讼。
- 甄别代理机构——选用信誉良好、正规备案的商标代理机构。
- 跟踪《商标法》修订，一旦可用即准备运用强制转移制度。
来源
- 《中华人民共和国商标法》（现行，1983 年及历次修正）及《规范商标申请注册行为若干规定》——国家知识产权局（CNIPA）：www.cnipa.gov.cn。
- 《系统治理商标恶意注册促进高质量发展工作方案（2023—2025 年）》——国家知识产权局：www.cnipa.gov.cn。
- 《关于〈中华人民共和国商标法（修订草案）〉的说明》及全国人大对草案的报道（2025–2026）——全国人民代表大会：www.npc.gov.cn；国家知识产权局新修订商标法看点（2026）：www.cnipa.gov.cn。
- 马德里商标国际注册体系（WIPO）作为指定中国的申请途径——国家知识产权局国际注册页面：www.cnipa.gov.cn。
相关阅读
- 外国品牌的商标注册
- 专利保护与知识产权执法
- 中国知识产权海关保护