Brazil maintains a centralised federal intellectual property register administered by the Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial (INPI), covering trademarks, patents, industrial designs, and technology transfer agreements. The register is searchable and partially open to the public. However, it does not tell the whole story: pending applications sit in backlogs that can stretch years. Recorded assignments may lag behind actual ownership changes. Additionally, the register says nothing about whether a rights holder is solvent, active. Alternatively, genuinely in control of the production chain. For any transaction or supply-chain due diligence involving IP-dependent goods or services originating in Brazil, the INPI register is a necessary first step – but it is far from sufficient.
What the INPI register covers
INPI is Brazil's single federal authority for IP registration. Its public database – the Busca de Marcas e Patentes system – covers four main categories:
- Trademarks (Marcas): word, figurative, and mixed marks registered or applied for in Brazil, classified under the Nice Classification. Each entry shows the applicant or owner of record, the filing date, the current procedural status (application, examination, opposition, registration, renewal, lapse), and the Nice classes covered.
- Patents and utility models (Patentes e Modelos de Utilidade): invention patents (valid for 20 years from filing) and utility model patents (15 years from filing). The database shows filing date, publication date, the title and abstract of the invention, the inventor(s) named, and the current owner of record if an assignment has been registered.
- Industrial designs (Desenhos Industriais): the visual or ornamental aspects of a product. Registration lasts an initial ten years, renewable up to a maximum of 25 years. The database shows ownership, filing date, and the applicable product category.
- Technology transfer and licence agreements (Contratos de Transferência de Tecnologia): INPI maintains a separate register for contracts involving the transfer of technology, technical assistance, and franchise arrangements between Brazilian and foreign parties. Registration is required for these agreements to be enforceable and for royalty payments to be remitted abroad without adverse tax treatment.
Beyond INPI, copyright in Brazil is not subject to mandatory registration. the Biblioteca Nacional and the Escola de Música do Brasil maintain voluntary copyright deposits. However. Absence from those records does not affect the existence or validity of copyright. Software copyright falls under the Lei do Software (Law 9.609/1998) and can be registered with INPI on a voluntary basis.
What the register discloses – field by field
Owner of record. The register shows the legal entity or individual currently recorded as the rights holder. Assignments of trademark and patent rights must be registered with INPI to be effective against third parties (erga omnes effect). Until registration of an assignment is completed, the transferee's title is valid only between the contracting parties. meaning the register may show the original transferor as owner even after a private contract has changed hands.
Status and procedural history. Each filing has a detailed procedural trail: publication dates in the Revista da Propriedade Industrial (RPI). Oppositions filed, administrative nullity proceedings, appeals to INPI's Recursal Board (JARI). Additionally, any court-ordered injunctions annotated against the record. This trail is important: a registration that appears "active" may be the subject of an ongoing administrative nullity action that could void it retroactively.
Nice class coverage (trademarks). Brazil follows the principle of speciality: a trademark registration protects the owner only in the Nice classes for which it was registered. A supplier may own a registered mark in one class while a third party holds an identical or similar mark in an adjacent class. The register shows this, but interpreting the risk requires substantive analysis, not just a status check.
Technology transfer contracts. The INPI technology transfer register shows whether a contract has been submitted, its general subject matter, the parties (domestic and foreign), and whether approval has been granted. It does not publish the financial terms, the technology specifications, or the exclusivity provisions. For supply-chain purposes this means you can confirm a licensing relationship exists, but not its scope or remaining term.
Priority claims. For patents filed under the Paris Convention or the PCT route, the database records the priority country and priority date. This matters for freedom-to-operate assessments: a patent with a foreign priority date may cover technology that predates its Brazilian filing date.
What the register does not show – the gaps that create supply risk
Pending backlog and examination delays. INPI has historically operated with significant examination backlogs. Trademark applications routinely take two to four years from filing to a first examination decision; patent applications can remain pending for considerably longer. A supplier may represent that it "has applied for" a mark or patent, with no certainty when – or whether – registration will be granted. The register shows the application exists, but offers no assurance of ultimate success.
Unregistered assignments. If a rights holder has sold or licensed IP rights but the assignment has not yet been registered with INPI, the register continues to show the former owner. In a supply context this means you may be dealing with a party that believes in good faith it owns rights that, at law. Are still formally attributed to someone else. or worse, to a party that has since entered insolvency proceedings.
Pledges and security interests over IP. Brazilian law permits IP rights to be pledged as security (penhor de direitos). Such pledges, when recorded with INPI, appear as annotations on the register. However, security interests created under different instruments – or not yet presented for annotation – do not appear. A supplier's IP portfolio may be encumbered in ways that are invisible in a standard register search.
Pending court actions and injunctions. Administrative nullity proceedings before INPI and appeals to JARI are visible. But judicial nullity actions filed directly in the federal courts (which have concurrent jurisdiction over IP nullity under Brazilian law) are not reflected in the INPI register unless a court order is specifically communicated and annotated. A registration may appear clean on INPI while being the subject of active federal court litigation that, if successful, would void it retroactively to the filing date.
Ownership of the operating entity. The IP register identifies the rights holder by name and CNPJ number. It says nothing about who owns or controls that entity, whether the entity is current on its tax obligations, whether it faces insolvency proceedings, or whether its corporate structure has changed. The CNPJ status (whether the company is active, suspended. Alternatively, cancelled with the Receita Federal) is obtainable separately from the Receita Federal's free public portal. However. This is a distinct query that must be run in addition to the INPI search. The Juntas Comerciais – state-level commercial registers – hold corporate documents and are fragmented by state, with no single unified national interface. Accessing full corporate records for a counterparty registered in, say, São Paulo versus Minas Gerais requires engaging the relevant Junta separately, and digitisation levels vary considerably across states.
Trade secrets and know-how. By definition, trade secrets do not appear in any register. A supplier's actual competitive advantage may rest entirely on unregistered know-how. The INPI register cannot tell you whether that know-how is adequately protected contractually, whether employees are bound by non-disclosure obligations, or whether there have been leakage incidents.
Geographical indications. Brazil has a separate INPI register for geographical indications (indications of origin and denominations of origin). For agricultural and agri-food supply chains this is relevant: a product may carry a claim of geographical origin that either is or is not backed by a valid registered GI. The GI register is public but must be searched separately from the trademark and patent databases.
The technology transfer register and supply chain implications
For cross-border supply relationships that involve a foreign entity licensing technology or a brand to a Brazilian manufacturer or distributor, the INPI technology transfer register is a critical but underused tool. Under Brazilian law, technology transfer agreements between related parties must be registered with INPI for royalty remittances abroad to be recognised by the Banco Central and for the payments to receive favourable withholding tax treatment under applicable treaties. An unregistered agreement is valid between the parties but creates significant fiscal and exchange-control risk for both the Brazilian entity and its foreign counterpart.
From a supply-risk perspective, discovering that a key supplier's production is based on a technology licence that has not been registered. or whose INPI registration has lapsed. means the supplier may be unable to continue remitting royalties abroad. This can lead to a renegotiation or termination of the upstream licence and. In turn, disruption of the supply arrangement. Searching the INPI technology transfer register before entering a significant purchasing commitment is therefore not merely a legal formality but a genuine commercial risk-management step.
Searching the register: what is publicly accessible
INPI provides public search access to trademark, patent, industrial design, and technology transfer databases without requiring user registration for basic queries. The Revista da Propriedade Industrial (RPI), published weekly, is also publicly available and serves as the official record of all procedural acts – oppositions, approvals, renewals, lapses, and assignments registered in any given week. Monitoring the RPI for entries relevant to a specific rights holder or trademark portfolio is a standard practice for Brazilian IP counsel and agents.
However, the databases have limitations in terms of cross-referencing. There is no single INPI query that simultaneously returns all IP assets owned by a given CNPJ across all four categories. Trademark, patent, industrial design, and technology transfer searches must be run separately. Sorting results by owner name is complicated by variations in corporate name spelling (company name at time of application may differ from current registered name after restructuring). Additionally. Searches by CNPJ number are more reliable but not universally implemented across all database interfaces.
Certified copies of individual registration certificates can be obtained from INPI for official purposes. These are issued by INPI on application and carry legal evidentiary weight. For use in litigation or formal due diligence, relying on database screenshots is generally not sufficient; certified certificates are the appropriate form of evidence.
Corporate layer: CNPJ and the Juntas Comerciais
Because the INPI register identifies rights holders by CNPJ, any IP due diligence must be paired with a corporate-layer check. The Receita Federal's CNPJ public portal allows free verification of whether a company's tax identification number is active, suspended, or cancelled – a basic but essential check. A company with a suspended or cancelled CNPJ is effectively non-operational from a regulatory standpoint. Yet its IP registrations may continue to appear as formally valid in the INPI database for the remainder of their registered term.
Full corporate records – articles of incorporation, shareholder registers, amendments, and financial statements for companies obliged to file them – are held by the Juntas Comerciais, which operate at the state level. Brazil has 27 state-level Juntas, each with its own digitisation level and access procedures. Some states (notably São Paulo, through the JUCESP portal) offer online access to at least some documents; others require in-person requests or engagement of a local correspondent. There is no single unified national corporate register that consolidates all Junta records, although REDESIM (Rede Nacional para a Simplificação do Registro e da Legalização de Empresas e Negócios) provides some federal coordination. This fragmentation is a structural limitation that must be factored into any timeline estimate for full corporate due diligence on a Brazilian counterparty.
Before a transaction or supply agreement: a practical checklist
Trademark clearance. Run searches across all relevant Nice classes, including phonetically and visually similar marks. Check status of each result: application only, registered, or lapsed. Look for annotated oppositions or nullity proceedings. Confirm the recorded owner's CNPJ is active.
Patent freedom-to-operate. Search both granted patents and published applications that may mature into granted rights. Note priority dates. Check for any INPI administrative nullity proceedings or published court-ordered annotations against the patents in question.
Assignment verification. If the supplier asserts it acquired IP rights from a predecessor, confirm the assignment is recorded at INPI. An unregistered assignment is not effective against third parties – including you as a potential purchaser or licensee.
Technology transfer contracts. If the supplier's production depends on a licensed technology from a foreign entity, verify that the relevant contract is registered with INPI and that the registration is current. Ask for a copy of the INPI approval letter.
Judicial search. Commission a federal court search (distribuição de processos) for actions filed against the IP rights holder and for judicial nullity actions naming specific registrations. This step is separate from INPI and requires engagement of Brazilian counsel with access to the federal court information system (PJe/PROJUDI or equivalent).
Security interests. Check INPI annotations for recorded pledges. Also review any available credit bureau or SERASA information on the counterparty, which may flag financial encumbrances not yet presented to INPI.
Corporate records. Obtain a certified extract from the relevant Junta Comercial confirming current corporate status. Current shareholders (to the extent required by the applicable corporate form). Additionally, any registered amendments affecting the entity's legal name or corporate purpose.
Timing and practical constraints
INPI database searches can be performed in real time. Certified registration certificates typically require a few business days from application. Corporate records from the Juntas Comerciais vary: JUCESP in São Paulo can produce certified documents within a few business days via its online portal. other states may take one to three weeks. Especially where physical archive retrieval is needed. Federal court distribution certificates (certidões de distribuição) are generally available within two to five business days once requested through Brazilian counsel.
For time-sensitive transactions, it is advisable to begin the corporate and judicial layers of the search simultaneously with the INPI search, rather than sequentially. Waiting for INPI results before commencing the Junta and court searches can add unnecessary weeks to the overall diligence timeline.
Where the chain breaks: a supply-risk summary
The structural weaknesses in Brazilian IP due diligence, from a supply-risk perspective, can be grouped into three categories:
Registration gaps. Assignments not yet annotated at INPI; security interests not yet presented for registration; technology transfer contracts not submitted or with lapsed INPI approval. These gaps mean the register's face value does not reflect actual legal reality.
Institutional fragmentation. INPI is federal and centralised, but corporate records are state-level and fragmented. Judicial records are held in state and federal courts with separate systems. There is no single portal that consolidates all relevant information for a counterparty due diligence. Each layer requires a separate query, often with a different timeline and a different access mechanism.
Backlog risk. Pending applications give no assurance of ultimate registration. A supplier that has filed but not yet obtained registration is commercially exposed: a third party could file a conflicting application, or the examination could result in a refusal. Supply agreements predicated on the assumption that pending applications will be granted should contain explicit contractual provisions addressing the scenario where registration is refused or challenged.
Understanding these limitations is not a reason to avoid Brazilian IP – Brazil is a major and growing market with a well-established IP legal framework. It is a reason to structure your due diligence process to go beyond a surface-level INPI search and to allocate adequate time and resources for the corporate and judicial layers that the register itself cannot supply.
How Ferraz & Whitmore can assist
Our team advises on cross-border transactions and supply arrangements involving Brazilian IP assets, including pre-transaction due diligence, technology transfer contract registration strategy, and IP audit support for supply-chain risk assessments. We coordinate with Brazilian correspondent counsel to cover the full scope of registry and court searches required for robust diligence. For inquiries, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com or visit our contacts page.
Further context on cross-border IP and technology transactions is available in our Analytics section, and our Intellectual Property practice page sets out the full scope of advisory services we provide.
Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information reflects publicly available sources and the authors' analysis as of the publication date indicated. Laws, regulations, and administrative practices in Brazil are subject to change. Readers should not act on the basis of this material without obtaining specific legal advice tailored to their circumstances. Ferraz & Whitmore accepts no liability for actions taken in reliance on the general information contained herein.