China's intellectual property courts have moved steadily toward higher damages awards, faster preliminary injunctions, and closer scrutiny of foreign rights holders' documentation. International businesses that registered trademarks several years ago and have not revisited their IP registration portfolio now face a real risk of finding their protections inadequate or procedurally defective when an infringement claim arises.
Recent shifts in Chinese court practice – consolidated through the specialist IP tribunal system – have raised the evidentiary bar for foreign claimants pursuing enforcement. Rights holders must now demonstrate continuous commercial use, proper Nice classification (the international goods and services classification system used in trademark application filings) coverage, and chain-of-title documentation before courts will grant interim relief. These changes affect foreign-invested enterprises, WFOE (wholly foreign-owned enterprise) structures, and brand owners seeking to enforce against counterfeit or infringing goods in the Chinese market.
This alert summarises the key developments, identifies which businesses are most exposed, and sets out the immediate actions international companies should prioritise.
What has changed – and when these shifts took effect
China's IP legislative regime has undergone a sustained period of reform. The amendments to trademark and patent legislation, along with guidance issued by the Zuigao Renmin Fayuan (Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China), have produced several concrete changes in court practice.
Increased damages for wilful infringement. Courts are applying a punitive multiplier for deliberate IP violations. The multiplier can reach several times the compensatory amount. This change – effective since the most recent round of legislative amendments – has also increased the incentive for rights holders to bring enforcement actions. It correspondingly raises the consequences for businesses that inadvertently infringe third-party rights registered in China.
Stronger preliminary injunction criteria. Courts now require more detailed evidence of ongoing harm before granting interim relief. Applicants must present use evidence, market impact data, and formal IP registration documentation aligned with current Nice classification standards. Filings that predate the classification updates may be rejected on procedural grounds.
Administrative enforcement coordination. The Guojia Shichang Jiandu Guanli Zongju (State Administration for Market Regulation, known as SAMR) has strengthened coordination with customs and the court system. Border seizures of infringing goods are now processed faster, but rights holders must maintain current recordals at customs to benefit from this mechanism. Lapsed or incomplete recordals result in missed seizure opportunities.
Opposition proceedings tightening. The China National Intellectual Property Administration has tightened procedural requirements in opposition proceedings. Third-party objections to pending trademark applications must now meet stricter evidence thresholds. For brand owners monitoring the register, this means that opposition proceedings filed without comprehensive evidence of prior use or prior rights are increasingly dismissed at the preliminary stage.
State Council directives on cross-border enforcement. Guidance from the State Council has signalled continued pressure on courts to deliver consistent, commercially credible IP decisions. This is relevant for businesses using CIETAC (China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission) arbitration clauses in IP licensing agreements. The alignment between court practice and arbitral practice is improving, but gaps remain – particularly on the recognition of foreign licence agreements.
For businesses operating through AI and technology-related structures in China, the intersection of IP enforcement and technology regulation is also evolving. Our analysis of AI law developments in China covers these overlapping regulatory pressures in detail.
To receive an expert assessment of your IP registration and enforcement position in China, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Who is affected – and the compliance threshold to apply
These shifts affect a broad range of international companies operating in or selling into the Chinese market. The categories of highest exposure are the following.
Brand owners with legacy trademark registrations. Companies that registered trademarks in China more than five years ago should audit their filings for classification gaps. The Nice classification has been updated multiple times. Goods or services not covered under current class headings may leave parts of a brand portfolio unprotected. An infringement claim filed against a product in an unregistered class will not succeed.
WFOE operators and joint venture structures. Foreign-invested entities that hold IP assets in China through a WFOE or joint venture must verify that ownership records at the China National Intellectual Property Administration are consistent with current corporate structure. Post-restructuring chain-of-title errors are a common cause of enforcement failure. Courts will not grant relief where title documentation is incomplete.
Exporters and online platform sellers. Businesses selling goods bearing registered trademarks through e-commerce platforms in China are subject to the platform's own take-down procedures as well as court-based enforcement. Platform operators now respond faster to rights holders with current customs recordals. Businesses without updated recordals lose this rapid-response tool.
Technology licensors. Companies licensing patents, software, or technical know-how into China through CIETAC arbitration clauses should review their licence agreements for compliance with the updated legislative requirements applicable to IP transactions. Clauses that pre-date the reform period may not be enforceable as drafted.
The threshold criterion for immediate action is straightforward: if your last IP audit in China was conducted more than two years ago, the current court practice developments represent a material compliance risk. The effective date for the most recent round of court-level guidance is early 2025. Businesses that have not updated their enforcement posture since then are operating on an outdated basis.
For a full review of your intellectual property position in China, our dedicated IP law practice in China provides comprehensive registration and enforcement support for international rights holders.
What to do now – immediate actions for international companies
The following actions should be initiated within the next 60 days. Delay increases the risk of enforcement gaps that cannot be remedied quickly once an infringement situation arises.
- Conduct a full trademark audit. Verify that all registered marks cover current goods and services under the applicable Nice classification. File additional class applications where gaps are identified. Priority prosecution typically takes several months – begin immediately.
- Update customs recordals. Register current IP rights with Chinese customs authorities. This enables border seizures of counterfeit goods before they enter circulation. Rights holders with lapsed recordals forfeit this mechanism entirely.
- Review chain-of-title documentation. Confirm that all IP assignments, licence agreements, and corporate restructuring records are correctly reflected in SAMR and China National Intellectual Property Administration registers. Engage local counsel to rectify any inconsistencies before litigation arises.
- Assess CIETAC arbitration clauses. Review existing licensing agreements for enforceability under current legislative requirements. Update dispute resolution clauses where necessary, and ensure that governing law provisions are consistent with Chinese IP legislation.
- Compile use evidence. Gather and organise evidence of commercial use for each registered trademark. Courts now require this at the injunction stage. Evidence should cover the most recent three-year period and include sales records, marketing materials, and distribution agreements bearing the mark.
International companies that take these steps now will be in a materially stronger position when enforcement action becomes necessary – whether as claimant or defendant. Companies that do not act risk finding their IP rights unenforceable at the moment they are most needed.
For comparative context on IP enforcement developments in other high-growth markets, our alert on IP enforcement developments in the UAE addresses parallel shifts in that jurisdiction.
About Ferraz & Whitmore
Ferraz & Whitmore is an international law firm based in Lisbon, advising business clients across 46 jurisdictions. Our Asia-Pacific practice supports international companies in managing IP registration, infringement claims, and enforcement strategy in China and across the region. We combine deep knowledge of Chinese IP legislation with cross-border experience in both civil law and common law systems – an advantage for clients whose IP portfolios span multiple markets. Our team has advised on trademark application programmes, opposition proceedings, and CIETAC arbitration clauses across the full range of technology and consumer-facing sectors. As a law firm in China-facing matters, we work with in-house counsel, investors, and exporters who need practical, results-oriented advice without jurisdictional blind spots. To discuss your IP enforcement position in China, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. Ferraz & Whitmore assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@ferrazwhitmore.com.