China’s Crackdown on Deceptive “Trick Trademarks”: What It Means for Foreign Brand Owners

2026-08-30 Trademark / 商标

  • China’s trademark office has been invalidating deceptive “trick trademarks” on its own motion in batches: by late August 2026 more than 1,980 marks — including “One Bucket Half” instant noodles, “Tu Zhu” (free-range) pork and “Hong Kong Big Pharmacy” — had been declared invalid without any complaint being filed.
    国家知识产权局商标局正依职权批量宣告无效”心机商标”：截至 2026 年 8 月底已有超过 1980 件标志被无效——包括”一桶半”方便面、”土猪”猪肉、”香港大药房”等，全程无需任何人投诉举报。
  • A mark is deceptive when its words lead consumers to a wrong conclusion about the quality, process, ingredients or origin of the goods; the classic test is whether the wording is a description that consumers would take at face value.
    判断欺骗性的关键是：标志文字是否会让消费者对商品的质量、工艺、原料或产地等产生误认；典型的判断标准是消费者会不会把这几个字当真理解。
  • “Tu Zha” (traditional cold-pressed), “Gu Fa” (ancient method) and similar process-suggesting words have been added to the office’s pre-application interception database, so such filings are rejected at the examination stage before they can ever register.
    “土榨””古法”等易引发工艺误认的词汇已被列入商标注册前置拦截词库，在审查阶段即被直接驳回，根本走不到注册环节。
  • The fully revised Trademark Law, adopted on 26 June 2026 and effective 1 January 2027, codifies the rule that deceptive signs cannot be registered or used and that already-registered deceptive marks may be invalidated.
    全面修订后的《商标法》（2026 年 6 月 26 日通过、2027 年 1 月 1 日施行）将”带有欺骗性的标志不得注册和使用，已注册的可依法宣告无效”写入法条。
  • For foreign brand owners the practical takeaway is that an existing registration is no longer a permanent shield: brand names built on descriptive or quality-suggesting wording should be audited now, and new product names should avoid descriptive claims.
    对外资品牌方的实操启示是：已有注册不再是一劳永逸的护身符——基于描述性或品质暗示性词汇的品牌名称应尽快审计，新产品命名应避免描述性宣称。
  • Enforcement is shifting from complaint-driven to proactive, full-lifecycle governance: batch ex officio invalidations, a pre-filing interception database and cross-agency checks on how marks are actually used on packaging and in advertising.
    商标监管正从”不告不理”转向主动的全链条治理：批量依职权无效、申请前置拦截词库，以及对包装与广告中商标实际使用情况的跨部门核查。

China’s Crackdown on Deceptive “Trick Trademarks”: What It Means for Foreign Brand Owners | 中国”心机商标”治理加码：对外资品牌方的合规启示

What a “trick trademark” is

In Chinese market regulation, a “trick trademark” (xin ji shang biao) is a mark that packages marketing buzzwords as registered trademarks. The operator registers a descriptive or quality-suggesting term — a cooking method, an ingredient, a size claim, an origin hint — and then prints it prominently on the packaging, often with a tiny “®” beside it, so consumers believe the product has been officially certified for that quality. Classic cases invalidated by the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) trademark office include “Yi Tong Ban” (one bucket and a half) instant noodles, which suggests a larger portion than the actual product, “Tu Zhu” (free-range pig) pork, which implies a particular farming method, and “Xiang Gang Da Yao Fang” (Hong Kong Big Pharmacy), which creates the impression of a long-established Hong Kong pharmacy. The line is drawn at deception: a mark is invalidated if its wording leads the public to form a wrong view about the quality, main raw materials, function, weight, quantity, origin or other characteristics of the goods.

The scale of the campaign

The trademark office has been publishing invalidations on its own motion in its “trick trademark” governance column. The cumulative count has climbed steadily through 2026: around 1,596 marks were listed by late July, roughly 1,782 by mid-August, and more than 1,980 by 28 August 2026. The latest published batch alone covered 105 marks. The affected categories are concentrated where consumers are most sensitive to claims — food, agricultural products, beverages, daily chemicals and health products. Two well-known examples from August 2026: the “Hu Ji Hua Gu Fa Tu Zha” (traditional cold-pressed) and “Jin Long Yu Tu Zha Feng Wei” marks used on cooking oil were invalidated ex officio just weeks after new national standards for edible oils took effect, and Colgate’s “Jin Bai” (bright white) teeth-whitening series was among the earlier batches.

How the system is changing

Three mechanisms are turning the campaign from one-off cleanups into a durable regime. First, pre-application interception: words that easily cause process or quality misconceptions — “Tu Zha” (traditional cold-pressed), “Gu Fa” (ancient method), “Shou Gong” (handmade) and similar — have been added to an interception database used by the intelligent examination system, so new applications containing them are rejected before registration. Second, retroactive clean-up: the office reviews existing registrations and invalidates deceptive marks ex officio, without waiting for a complaint or an opposition, and the exercise now covers marks registered years ago. Third, cross-agency enforcement: regulators check how marks are actually used on packaging and in advertising, closing the gap between what is registered and what is presented to consumers. Under the fully revised Trademark Law, effective 1 January 2027, deceptive signs are explicitly barred from registration and use, and already-registered deceptive marks may be declared invalid — giving the crackdown a firmer statutory footing.

What this means for foreign brand owners

For foreign companies selling in China, the practical consequences are real. A registered trademark is no longer a permanent shield: marks built on descriptive or quality-suggesting wording — a product feature, a raw material, a claim of authenticity — are the exact targets of the campaign and can be invalidated years after registration. Second, invalidation has teeth: once a mark is declared invalid, its exclusive right is deemed never to have existed, the mark must stop being used, and packaging and advertising that rely on it must be changed. Third, the wording rules matter at the naming stage: a product name that merely describes an attribute (e.g. “zero sugar”, “handmade”, “free-range”) may be refused registration as lacking distinctiveness or barred outright as deceptive, so foreign brand owners should build names that are distinctive rather than descriptive, and verify the Chinese-language rendering of their brands against the interception vocabulary before filing.

A practical compliance checklist

Foreign brand owners should take five steps. (1) Audit the existing portfolio: identify any Chinese-language marks containing descriptive, quality-suggesting or process-suggesting words, and assess invalidation risk under the new law. (2) Review packaging and advertising: where a mark has already been invalidated, stop using it immediately and plan the packaging change; where a mark is still registered but descriptive, weigh a voluntary phase-out. (3) Rethink new product naming: choose coined or arbitrary marks with clear distinctiveness, and check the interception vocabulary before filing. (4) Tighten agent and distributor contracts: require brand users to follow CNIPA decisions and to change packaging promptly if a mark is invalidated, and allocate the cost of re-branding clearly. (5) Calendar the transition: the revised Trademark Law takes effect on 1 January 2027, and the window between now and then is the right time to clean up the portfolio, plan refilings and adjust the brand architecture. The campaign is not aimed at foreign brands in particular — it targets deceptive use of the trademark system — but foreign companies that have relied on descriptive Chinese names are among those most exposed.

Sources

中国”心机商标”治理加码：对外资品牌方的合规启示

什么是”心机商标”

在市场治理语境中，”心机商标”指把营销话术包装成注册商标的做法：经营者把描述性或暗示品质的词汇——一种工艺、一种原料、一个分量承诺、一个产地暗示——注册成商标，再放大印在包装上，旁边缀一个不起眼的”®”，让消费者误以为该品质已获官方认证。已被国家知识产权局商标局宣告无效的典型案例包括：”一桶半”方便面（暗示分量更大）、”土猪”猪肉（暗示特定养殖方式）、”香港大药房”（营造香港百年老店的印象）。判断界限在于欺骗性：标志文字如果会使公众对商品的质量、主要原料、功能、重量、数量、产地及其他特点产生误认，即构成无效理由。

治理的规模

商标局在其”心机商标”治理专栏持续公示依职权宣告无效的名单。2026 年累计数量一路攀升：7 月底约 1596 件，8 月中旬约 1782 件，截至 8 月 28 日已超过 1980 枚；最新一批公示即达 105 件。涉及品类集中在消费者对宣称最敏感的领域——食品、农产品、饮料、日化与保健品。两个 8 月的知名案例：食用油”胡姬花古法土榨””金龙鱼土榨风味”两枚商标在食用油四项新国标落地数周后即被依职权宣告无效；高露洁”劲白”美白系列也在此前批次之列。

监管机制正在升级

三套机制使治理从一次性清理转为长效机制。其一，申请前置拦截：易引发工艺或品质误认的词汇——”土榨””古法””手工”等——已进入智能审查系统使用的拦截词库，含此类词汇的新申请在注册前即被驳回。其二，存量回溯清理：商标局依职权复查存量注册并宣告欺骗性商标无效，无需等待投诉或异议，清理范围已覆盖多年前注册的标志。其三，跨部门联动：监管部门核查包装与广告中商标的实际使用情况，堵住”注册归注册、宣传归宣传”的漏洞。2027 年 1 月 1 日施行的新《商标法》更明确”带有欺骗性的标志不得注册和使用，已注册的可依法宣告无效”，为治理提供了更坚实的法律依据。

对外资品牌方的意义

对外资品牌方而言，实际影响非常具体。其一，注册商标不再是永久护身符：基于描述性或品质暗示性词汇的品牌——一个产品卖点、一种原料、一句”正宗”宣称——正是本轮治理的目标，可能在注册多年后被宣告无效。其二，无效后果有实打实的约束力：商标被无效后，专用权自始不存在，标志必须停止使用，依赖它的包装与广告都要更换。其三，命名阶段就要守规则：直接描述属性的产品名（如”零糖””手工””散养”）可能因缺乏显著性被驳回，或因欺骗性被直接禁止，因此应构建显著性强的臆造词品牌，并在申请前把中文译名对照拦截词库核查一遍。

实操合规清单

外资品牌方建议落实五步。（1）审计现有商标组合：找出含描述性、品质暗示或工艺暗示文字的中文商标，按新法评估无效风险。（2）审查包装与广告：商标已被无效的立即停用并规划换装；仍在注册期但属描述性的，权衡主动退市。（3）重构新品命名：优先选择臆造词或任意词以确保显著性，申请前核查拦截词库。（4）收紧代理与经销商合同：要求品牌使用者遵从商标局决定、商标被无效后及时更换包装，并明确重新包装的费用承担。（5）排好过渡日历：新《商标法》2027 年 1 月 1 日施行，从现在到年底正是清理组合、规划重新申请、调整品牌架构的窗口期。本轮治理并非针对外资品牌，而是打击对商标制度的欺骗性利用——但依赖描述性中文名称的外资企业，恰恰暴露度最高。

Sources