Skip to main content

China Trademark Law 2026 Revision: Key Changes Every Brand Owner Must Know

Introduction China has completed the most consequential rewrite of its Trademark Law in over a decade. On June 26, 2026, the 23rd Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Fourteenth National People's Congress adopted a comprehensive revision of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China — the fifth amendment since the law was first enacted in 1982, and the first substantive overhaul since the narrow 2019 revision. The revised law, comprising 87 articles across nine chapters (up from 73 articles in eight chapters under the outgoing law), will enter into force on January 1, 2027. Trademarks registered before that date remain valid. For brand owners, in-house counsel, and IP practitioners with China exposure, this is not a routine update. The revision touches registration standards, opposition timelines, well-known mark protection, damages calculations, and — perhaps most significantly — the treatment of bad-faith and speculative filings that have long troubled foreig...
Post a Comment

Use of registered marks on the Google Ads Program as keywords amounts to trademark infringement and constitutes passing-off: Delhi High Court

 

In the matter of Makemytrip India Private Limited vs Booking.com B. V. & Ors., vide its order dated 27th April 2022, Justice Pratibha M. Singh of Delhi High Court granted injunction in favour of Make My Trip (hereinafter “MMT”.

MMT had filed the suit seeking protection of its registered trademarks 'MakeMyTrip' and its variants used by Booking.com B.V. as keywords on the Google Ads Program for promoting its services as advertisements when search results are displayed on the Google search engine. The contention of MMT was that when a search is carried out for 'MakeMyTrip' in the Google search bar, quite often the first advertisement which is displayed in the search results in the advertisement category is that of Booking.com, who is one of the major competitors of MMT. According to MMT, such use of its registered mark would constitute infringement, especially when done by its competitor such as booking.com.

 

Booking.com relied on the judgment of the European Commission in Case AT.40428-GUESS dated 17th December, 2018 (“Guess” judgement), that there cannot be any restriction on the use of a trademark on the Google Ads Program as a keyword, including by competitors. Booking.com contended that apart from conducting business in India, it is also a global player in the area of providing hotel bookings, airline bookings etc. An injunction restraining it from bidding on the trade mark of MMT would put it in contravention of the law of other foreign jurisdictions such as the European Union. Therefore, it ought to be permitted to file a reply in this matter, before any order is passed. It further contended that any restriction which may be put on the use of MMT’s mark 'MakeMyTrip' as a keyword through the Google Ads Program would be contrary to competition law. It was finally contended that the words 'make', 'my', 'trip' can be used in a generic and descriptive fashion, which in any case ought not to be injuncted in view of Sections 34 and 35 of the Act. 

Court observed that the factual background of the present case is distinct from those in the judgment of the European Commission in “Guess” case/judgement. The European Commission was concerned therein with a case where authorised distributors and retailers of 'GUESS' products were contractually being prevented from using 'GUESS' brand names and trademarks as keywords or bidding on the Google Ads Program. Court observed that the European Commission was dealing with 'intra-brand' competition and partitioning national markets, being restricted contractually. In the case at hand, the facts are entirely different as MMT seeks to restrict Booking.com, which is its competitor, from using its mark as a keyword through Google Ads Program.

Court observed that as per Kerly's Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names (15th Ed., p.628 & 629) a third party bidding on trademarks as sponsored keywords for use by internet search engines can constitute misrepresentation. The "invisible" use of a mark as a keyword (metatag) can constitute passing off as a matter of principle.

Court was prima facie of the opinion that the use of MMT 's registered mark 'MakeMyTrip' on the Google Ads Program as a keyword amounts to trademark infringement and would be detrimental to MMT's monetary interest. Court opined that it is not permissible to allow competitors such as Booking.com and even Google to encash upon the reputation of MMT's mark for their own monetary advantage.

Court restrained Booking.com as well as Google from using the mark 'MakeMyTrip' together/ in conjunction, with or without spaces for the purpose of using it as a keyword on the Google Ads Program till the next date of hearing.

Being conscious of global repercussion of the interim injunction, court also clarified that the injunction shall be restricted to the territory of India and granted one week’s time to Booking.com and google to comply with/implement the order.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2024: What the New Flexibility Gives You — and the Hard Deadlines It Cannot Touch

Introduction On 15 March 2024, the Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2024 came into force and quietly rewrote the rhythm of patent prosecution in India. Practitioners who had spent two decades telling clients "this deadline cannot be extended, full stop" suddenly found themselves revising standard advice: many timelines that were once immovable can now be bought back, at a price, under the liberalised Rule 138. But here lies the trap — and it is a trap that has already caught applicants who read the headlines and not the fine print. The 2024 amendments are subordinate legislation made under Section 159 of the Patents Act, 1970. They can soften only those timelines that live in the Rules . Where the Act itself fixes a period and attaches a consequence — "deemed abandoned," "deemed withdrawn," "shall not be entertained" — no Rule, however generously worded, can rescue a defaulting applicant. Only Parliament can. This article does two things. First, it wal...
Post a Comment
Read more

Myanmar's New Trademark Law: A Shift Toward a Modern Registration System

On January 30, 2019, the Parliament of Myanmar passed the country's first modern Trademark Law, marking a significant step toward aligning Myanmar's intellectual property regime with international standards. This legislation will replace the existing practice—under which trademark rights are secured merely by registering a Declaration of Ownership with the Office of the Registration of Deeds—with a formal, examination-based trademark registration system. To administer this new regime, Myanmar will establish an Intellectual Property Office ("IPO") under the Ministry of Commerce. Transition for Existing Registrations Recognizing that numerous trademarks are already on record under the old declaration-based system, the IPO will introduce a "soft-opening" period, commencing in January 2020, during which owners of existing registrations may re-file their marks with the IPO. This re-filing window will remain open for six (6) months, and re-filed marks will be a...
5 comments
Read more