International companies holding trademarks, patents, or other registered intellectual property in Japan face a changed enforcement environment. Japanese courts and the Japan Patent Office (JPO) have refined their approach to infringement claims, opposition proceedings, and damages assessment in ways that demand immediate attention from rights holders operating in the market.
Japan's IP enforcement regime has shifted toward stronger remedies for rights holders, with courts applying more expansive damages calculations in infringement claims and the JPO tightening procedural requirements in opposition proceedings. International businesses with registered or pending IP in Japan must review their portfolios and enforcement postures against these updated standards. Compliance with revised filing and classification requirements under the Nice Classification system should be completed before the next renewal or opposition window.
This alert identifies the key changes, the business categories most exposed, and five immediate actions your legal team should take now.
What has changed – and when it took effect
Japanese intellectual property legislation has been updated to reflect growing commercial pressure from cross-border digital trade and AI-generated content disputes. The changes cluster around three areas.
Damages in infringement proceedings. Courts in Japan now apply a broader reading of lost profits and unjust enrichment when assessing compensation in an infringement claim. The Intellectual Property High Court (IP High Court) – Japan's specialist appellate body for IP disputes – has moved away from conservative royalty-based awards. Rights holders can now pursue damages more closely tied to actual commercial loss. This shift applies to proceedings initiated from early 2025 onward.
Opposition proceedings at the JPO. The JPO has updated procedural rules governing opposition proceedings after publication of a trademark application. The window for filing an opposition remains two months from publication, but the JPO now requires more granular evidence of prior use and market recognition at the outset. Submissions that previously succeeded at a summary level are being returned for supplementation. This change took effect across all opposition filings reviewed from the second quarter of 2025.
Nice Classification alignment. Japan has aligned more strictly with the international Nice Classification system. IP registration applications that rely on broad or vague class descriptions are being rejected or required to narrow their goods-and-services specifications before acceptance. This affects both new applications and renewals where specifications have not been updated to current standards.
Companies whose IP registrations predate these procedural shifts – or whose enforcement strategies were calibrated to earlier, more conservative damages expectations – face real exposure if they do not act promptly.
To receive an expert assessment of your IP portfolio's exposure in Japan, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Which business categories are most affected
The changes carry direct consequences for four categories of international business.
Consumer goods and retail brands. Companies with trademark registrations in Japan covering physical goods must verify that their class specifications meet current JPO standards. Where specifications were filed under broad descriptions, there is a material risk that an opposition proceeding or renewal review will expose gaps. A competitor could exploit a poorly specified registration to narrow your protected scope.
Technology and software companies. Patent holders in the software, AI, and semiconductor sectors face heightened scrutiny of claim scope during enforcement. The IP High Court has signalled greater willingness to award meaningful damages where infringement is established – but the threshold for proving the technical scope of an infringement claim has also risen. Companies relying on older patent filings that predate current claim-drafting norms should audit their portfolio urgently. Our alert on AI and technology law in Japan covers related developments for technology businesses operating in this market.
Licensors and franchise operations. Businesses that license their IP to Japanese partners bear indirect risk. If the underlying registration is vulnerable – because class descriptions are non-compliant or because the licensor has not enforced against third-party infringers – the licence structure itself may be challenged. Japanese IP legislation places affirmative obligations on rights holders to maintain and defend their registrations.
E-commerce and cross-border sellers. Online marketplaces operating in Japan have increased cooperation with rights holders under JPO-aligned enforcement programmes. International sellers who have not completed IP registration in Japan – relying instead on home-jurisdiction registrations – will find that infringement claims against Japanese-based copycat sellers require local registration as a threshold condition. Without it, enforcement options are severely curtailed.
Our full analysis of intellectual property law and strategy in Japan sets out the broader registration and enforcement options available to international rights holders.
What to do now – five immediate actions
The following actions should be completed as a priority, ideally before the next JPO filing or renewal deadline applicable to your portfolio.
- Audit your trademark specifications. Review every active trademark application and registration in Japan against current Nice Classification standards. Identify any broad or ambiguous class descriptions and prepare amended specifications for submission at the earliest available opportunity.
- Reassess pending opposition proceedings. If you have filed – or plan to file – an opposition against a third-party trademark application, confirm that your evidence of prior use and market recognition meets the JPO's updated evidentiary threshold. Submissions that fall short will be returned, and the opposition window does not pause during supplementation.
- Quantify your damages position. For any active or contemplated infringement claim, instruct your legal team to reassess the damages calculation in light of the IP High Court's broader approach. Rights holders who have accepted royalty-based settlements without exploring lost-profits claims may have significantly undervalued their position.
- Register unprotected IP before enforcement. If you are operating in Japan without local IP registration – relying on cross-border brand recognition or home-jurisdiction rights – file a trademark application or patent application immediately. Enforcement against infringers in Japan requires registered rights as a practical matter.
- Review licence agreements. Examine existing licence agreements with Japanese partners to confirm that they include adequate sub-licensing controls, infringement notification obligations, and provisions that preserve the licensor's standing to enforce independently if the licensee fails to act.
Comparable shifts in IP enforcement practice across other high-growth markets are covered in our alert on IP enforcement developments in the UAE.
About Ferraz & Whitmore
Ferraz & Whitmore is an international law firm based in Lisbon, advising clients across 46 jurisdictions on intellectual property protection, IP registration strategy, infringement claims, and cross-border enforcement. Our IP practice covers both civil law and common law systems, with particular depth in Asia-Pacific markets including Japan. As an international law firm in Japan-related matters, we work alongside local counsel and advise international businesses, institutional investors, and in-house legal teams who need a lawyer with Japan expertise and a cross-border perspective. The firm's IP team includes practitioners with experience before specialist IP tribunals and international arbitral bodies across multiple regions. To discuss your IP position in Japan or any other jurisdiction, 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.