The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has opened applications for the WIPO Global Awards 2026, a competition celebrating startups and SMEs that use intellectual property (IP) to grow their business and generate positive impact.

Entrepreneurs from all industries and all regions of the world can apply between 15 January and 31 March 2026.

Applications are accepted in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Spanish, and Russian.

In 2026, 11 companies will be selected: 10 winners across all economic sectors, 1 Thematic Prize in Sports, and 2 Special Mentions (Best Woman Entrepreneur and Best Youth Entrepreneur).

Related reading: WIPO China: Apply Now | WIPO Global Awards 2026 Open for Startups and SMEs Worldwide

(Source: WIPO China)

The Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) of China has recently amended the Operational Directions for Deferral of Substantive Examination of Invention and Design Patent Applications again. These amended directions take effect on January 1, 2026. Key points include:

I. It is clarified that a request for deferral of substantive examination of an invention patent application shall be filed only once. The current three-year time limit for filing a request to defer substantive examination and for the resumption of examination is relaxed to five years. (See Points 2 and 4 of the amended provisions for details)

II. It is clarified that a request for deferral of substantive examination of a design patent application shall be filed only once. The current one-year time limit for filing a request to defer substantive examination and for the resumption of examination is relaxed to two years. (Points 3 and 4 of the amended provisions)

III. The grounds for rejection on which the patent authority may refuse to accept a request for deferral of substantive examination or terminate the procedure of deferral of substantive examination are clarified. (Point 7 of the amended provisions)

Related reading: https://www.tipo.gov.tw/tw/patents/515-68715.html

(Source: UNITALEN)

The Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) of China has announced that its "Positive Patent Examination Pilot Program for Startup Companies", launched on a trial basis in 2025, was originally scheduled to expire on December 31, 2025. According to TIPO's statistics, since the implementation of the pilot program, the average examination period for applications filed by applicants under the program—from filing to the issuance of examination results—has been approximately 66 days (about 2.2 months), which is significantly faster than the normal examination timeline for invention patents. In view of the satisfactory results achieved during the pilot period, TIPO has decided to extend the pilot program for another year, effective January 1, 2026, and continues to encourage eligible startup companies to make full use of the program.

(Source: UNITALEN)

Recently, the Guangdong High People's Court rendered a final judgment in the case of HARMAN International Industries, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "HARMAN") v. Shenzhen Qikang Medical Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Defendant") et al. concerning disputes of trademark infringement and unfair competition (2025) Yue Min Zhong No. 3065). The Court held that the "JBL" series trademarks registered by HARMAN for goods including "Loudspeakers; Earphone" in Class 9 are well-known trademarks, and ordered the infringing parties to immediately cease using the "JBL" mark on goods including hearing aids in Class 10, compensate for damages, and eliminate adverse effects.

Case Brief

In this case, the Defendant prominently used the "JBL" mark on its hearing aid products and in promotional materials, and misappropriated images of HARMAN's audio and earphone products for false advertising. Faced with the difficulty that the goods involved are of different classes and are not similar, the Unitalen legal team adopted effective trial strategies to prompt the Court to initiate the well-known trademark recognition procedure. The Court ultimately held that, as of the filing date of the Defendant's infringing trademark (September 15, 2021), the "JBL" trademark had enjoyed an extremely high reputation among the relevant public through long-term extensive use and promotion, and thus constituted a well-known trademark. The Defendant's acts constituted imitation and dilution of the well-known trademark and shall be enjoined in accordance with the law.

This victory marks the first time the "JBL" brand has been judicially recognized as a well-known trademark in China, representing a landmark breakthrough in China's intellectual property protection. The success of this case would not have been possible without the mutual trust and close collaboration between the Unitalen legal team and HARMAN's global and China legal teams. The client team provided long-term key evidence in this case, featuring a complete system and extensive coverage, including sales, promotions, market position, and prior protection records, which laid a solid factual foundation for the recognition of the well-known trademark and served as an indispensable pillar for the case's success.

Case Significance

The judgment in this case further reflects the Chinese judiciary's commitment to providing strong protection for well-known brands and sets a valuable precedent for similar cases. It carries positive exemplary significance for encouraging innovation and maintaining a fair and competitive market order.

Case Brief

The Thermos brand was founded in Germany in 1904 and has grown to become the world's largest professional manufacturer of high-vacuum stainless steel household products, with products sold in more than 140 countries and enjoying an extremely high reputation worldwide. In 1995, the Thermos brand officially entered the Chinese market. After 30 years of development, Thermos (China) Housewares Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Thermos" or "the Plaintiff") has established branches throughout provinces and cities across China. Its products include vacuum stainless steel insulated cups, thermal cookers, and other household and kitchen insulated products. Thermos has been awarded numerous honors, including "Top Ten Famous Brands of Metal Kitchen Utensils and Tableware in China" and "Top Ten Enterprises in China's Metal Kitchen Utensils and Tableware Manufacturing Industry".

Upon investigation by the Plaintiff, it was found that a Shenzhen-based cultural company, a Shenzhen-based industrial company, and a Shenzhen-based technology company (collectively referred to as "the three Defendants") are affiliated companies, and have massively produced, sold, and promoted vacuum flasks prominently bearing the "THERMOS" mark (hereinafter referred to as the "accused products"). The three Defendants operated official stores on JD.com, Tmall, WeChat Stores, WeChat Mini Programs, and Douyin to sell the accused products, and promoted them through their official websites, WeChat Official Accounts, and Douyin. They prominently used the infringing mark "THERMOS" on official website domain names, product promotional images, product detail pages, the products themselves, product packaging, and product instruction manuals. In response to the above trademark infringement acts committed by the three Defendants, Thermos filed a lawsuit with the Shenzhen Qianhai Cooperation Zone People's Court, Guangdong Province.

Judgment Opinions

I. THERMOS does not constitute a generic term for vacuum flask products.

II. Considering the Defendants' trademark filing conduct, the Defendants had subjective intent to free-ride on a highly renowned brand, and the accused acts constitute trademark infringement.

III. The three Defendants shall bear legal liability for ceasing the infringement, compensating for damages, and eliminating adverse effects.

The Shenzhen Qianhai Cooperation Zone People's Court, Guangdong Province, held, in the first instance, that the three Defendants are affiliated companies and share a common commercial purpose of profiting from the production and sale of the accused products. They had subjective intent to commit joint infringement and objectively carried out joint infringing acts, and shall therefore bear joint and several liability for infringement. The Court ordered as follows: (1) the three Defendants shall immediately cease the infringing acts; (2) the Shenzhen-based cultural company shall publish a statement in China Intellectual Property News to eliminate the adverse effects; and (3) the three Defendants shall compensate the Plaintiff a total of RMB 800,000 for economic losses and reasonable expenses.

Judgment Highlights

The judgment marks the first time that the defense of "genericization of the THERMOS trademark" has been systematically addressed in a civil case. The Court clearly held that although the trademark has generated a certain association with "vacuum flasks" among some members of the public as a result of long-term and extensive use, it has not reached the level of being universally regarded as a generic term by the relevant public nationwide. This finding fills a long-standing gap in judicial practice caused by inadequate review of "trademark genericide".

The judgment establishes a judicial review criterion in determining "generic terms". It clearly elaborates on the statutory requirements and timing for determining a generic term, emphasizing that such determination shall be based on factual status as of the trademark filing date or registration date, and shall comprehensively consider national standards, industry practices, reference book records, and the general perception of the relevant public nationwide. In this case, the Court held that "THERMOS" continues to identify the source of the goods and has not lost its distinctiveness as a trademark.

The judgment completely rejects the "legitimacy" of bad-faith registration and use. The Court pointed out that the Defendants continued to use the "THERMOS" mark in commercial activities even after their trademark applications, including "XUEGUTHERMOS" and "HeirloomThermos," were rejected. Such conduct clearly demonstrates subjective intent to free-ride on the goodwill of the Plaintiff's brand, and does not constitute bona fide or reasonable descriptive use. This finding serves as a strong judicial deterrent against acts that attempt to register marks incorporating elements of well-known trademarks and then assert "fair use".

Typical Significance

The judgment vindicates "THERMOS" at the civil judicial level for the first time. It provides a valuable Chinese judicial precedent for many highly renowned brands at home and abroad facing similar risks. The civil judgment in this case is consistent with the administrative confirmation proceedings, in which the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has repeatedly rejected the Defendants' trademark registration applications incorporating the term "THERMOS". This reflects the inherent consistency between the findings in civil infringement cases and the standards applied in administrative reviews. The case also provides positive guidance for market entities on curbing "free-riding" conduct in commercial activities.

Case Brief

GILMAR S.P.A. (hereinafter referred to as "GILMAR" or "the Plaintiff") was founded in Italy in 1962 and officially launched the fashion brand "ICEBERG" in 1974. At present, "ICEBERG" apparel has become GILMAR's flagship brand, enjoying extremely high fame and reputation worldwide. In China, GILMAR owns registered trademarks No. 512611 " " and No. 18155310 " " for goods including "clothing" in Class 25.

A Hangzhou-based e-commerce company (hereinafter referred to as "the Hangzhou-based e-commerce company" or "the Defendant") sold a large quantity of clothing products bearing the "ICE" and "ICEBERG" marks (as shown below) in its official Douyin and JD.com stores. It prominently used the relevant marks in store promotions, product packaging, hangtags, and the like. In response to the above trademark infringement acts committed by the Defendant, GILMAR filed a lawsuit with the Xiaoshan Primary People's Court, Hangzhou.

Judgment Highlights

1. Trademark infringement established

The first-instance Court held that the Defendant used the "ICE" mark in store promotions and on various garments for sale, and used the "ICEBERG" mark on two styles of sweaters. The above marks served to identify the source of the clothing, constituting trademark use that was likely to cause confusion among consumers regarding the origin of the goods. Although the Defendant argued that a third party authorized its use, the rights underlying such authorization were defective and could not override GILMAR's prior registered trademark rights.

2. Defendant was ordered to bear the legal liability of ceasing infringement, paying full compensation, and eliminating adverse effects

The Court held that although the stores involved have been closed, to prevent the reoccurrence of similar infringing acts, the Court ordered: (1) the Defendant shall immediately cease the infringing acts; (2) publish a statement for three consecutive days in a non-gutter position of China Intellectual Property News to eliminate the adverse effects; and (3) pay full compensation of RMB 1,000,000 as claimed by the Plaintiff, including reasonable expenses such as attorney's fees, notarization fees and evidence-gathering fees.

Typical Significance

This case is a typical example of a well-known foreign brand successfully safeguarding its rights in the Chinese market against acts of "free-riding" and full-scale brand imitation involving obvious subjective bad faith. The Court fully considered the long-established global reputation and market influence of "ICEBERG" as an Italian affordable luxury brand, and awarded high compensation within the statutory damages range. This demonstrates China's firm stance on providing judicial protection for intellectual property in line with international standards and on equally and effectively safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese and foreign right holders.

Recently, World Trademark Review (WTR), the authoritative international IP media, released the 2026 WTR 1000 Global Leading Trademark Firms. Unitalen Attorneys at Law, with its outstanding expertise and strong reputation, has once again been ranked as a gold firm for trademark prosecution and strategy, and a silver firm for trademark protection and litigation in China. Meanwhile, Unitalen partners Lei (Ray) Zhao, Ying Huang, and Lili Qin have been named to the Top Recommended Lawyers list for their outstanding professional capabilities and strong industry reputations.

Recently, Asia IP, the authoritative international IP media, released its "Top 100 IP Experts in China 2025" list. Six Unitalen partners—Deshan Li, Lei (Ray) Zhao, Yi Zheng, Wei Pan, Bing Li, and Yaqi Tan—have been named to the Top 100 IP Experts list for their outstanding professional expertise, remarkable track records, and industry influence.