The Difference Between US, EU and China Trademark Systems

Home | HS Blog | How US, EU and China Trademark Systems Differ Table of Contents Toggle Our team handles trademark work around the world for our clients, but the jurisdictions with which we work the most are the United States, European Union, and China. While there are considerable similarities among these three jurisdictions when it comes to trademark law, in this post we look at how the U.S., E.U., and China trademark systems differ. 1. Jurisdictional Levels In the U.S., trademarks can be registered at the federal level, with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Additionally, trademarks can be registered at the state level, usually with the relevant Secretary of State. In addition, unregistered trademarks enjoy certain protection. As for Europe, protection is available at the European Union (EU) level, as well as at the national level. At the EU level, marks are registered with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). Meanwhile, each member country has its own national trademark office, such as Spain's Oficina Española de Patentes y Marcas (OEPM). For companies with business activities in more than one EU country, an EU trademark usually makes sense. Subnational protection, similar to that extended by U.S. states, is not available in Europe, and there is generally very little, if any, protection available for unregistered trademarks. In China, trademarks are the remit of the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA), specifically its Trademark Office. While there is no subnational protection in mainland China, it is worth mentioning that Hong Kong and Macau have their own trademark systems, with trademarks registered in mainland China having no validity in these two special administrative regions (and vice versa). 2. How Do U.S., EU and China Trademark Use Requirements Differ? One way in which the U.S., EU and China trademark systems differ involves requirements for use of the trademark. In the United States trademark registrations are based on use in commerce. A federal trademark registration will not be finalized until the applicant successfully files a statement of use with the USPTO, though applications can be filed prior to use on an intent-to-use (ITU) basis. At the state level, actual use is usually required, with ITU applications not possible. In the EU, by contrast, there is no requirement that a mark be used in commerce for it to be registered. This said, interested parties can request the cancellation of a mark on the basis of non-use if it is not used for five consecutive years. China does not have a use requirement, though interested parties can request the cancellation of a trademark registration if the mark is not used for three consecutive years. 3. Different Treatment for Similar Marks in US, EU and China Another one of the ways in which the US, EU and China trademark systems differ concerns similar marks. USPTO examiners proactively reject applications if the applied-for presents a "likelihood of confusion" with an already registered mark. CNIPA examiners also proactively reject applications on grounds of similarity. By contrast, the EUIPO will not reject a mark on the basis that it is similar to a registered trademarks. It is up to the owner of the trademark to monitor and oppose trademark applications as becomes necessary. For most trademark owners, as a practical matter it is necessary to work with trademark counsel to effectively monitor new applications. 4. How US, EU and China Trademark Opposition Periods Differ In the United States, the standard opposition period is 30 days. During this period, interested parties can file oppositions to the registration of the trademark in question. Extension can be obtained, but only parties who apply for extensions can file oppositions during the additional period. The EU opposition period is three months, with no extensions. China's opposition period is also three months. These are, of course, not the only differences between the European and American trademark systems, but hopefully they illustrate both the general similarities between the system as well as give a flavor for their different characters. Check Out Our Practice Areas Share Twitter Facebook LinkedIn E-mail Comment Fred Rocafort Fred leads Harris Sliwoski’s intellectual property practice and is the coordinator of the firm’s international team. Much of Fred’s practice consists of helping cannabis businesses protect their brands. He also works with entrepreneurs and companies entering the Web3 space, a new frontier for IP law. Prior to joining Harris Sliwoski, Fred worked overseas for more than a decade, in both government and private sector roles. Fred is a regular contributor to the award-winning China Law Blog and Canna Law Blog. Fred began his career overseas as a U.S. consular officer in Guangzhou, China, where he advocated for fairer treatment of American companies and citizens in China and for stronger intellectual property rights enforcement. After entering the private sector, Fred worked at a Shanghai law firm as a foreign legal advisor and later joined one of the oldest American law firms in China, helping foreign companies navigate the Chinese legal environment. He also led the legal team at a Hong Kong-based brand protection consultancy, spending most of his time out in the field, protecting clients against counterfeiters and fraudsters in Greater China, Southeast Asia and Latin America. In addition to his IP work, as a native Spanish speaker, Fred works closely with different Harris Sliwoski teams on Latin America and Spain matters. Fred also provides advice to cannabis industry participants and other businesses on import and export transactions. Fred is an ardent supporter of FC Barcelona—and would be even in the absence of Catalan forebears who immigrated to Puerto Rico in the mid-1800s. Harris Sliwoski Attorney Read more posts [email protected] Read More Intellectual Property Law Related Posts August 10, 2026 Trademark Registration in Central America: How to Build a Country-by-Country Filing Strategy August 7, 2026 United States Trademark Ownership Errors: How Small Filing Mistakes Become Expensive Problems May 18, 2026 Registering a Trademark in Venezuela: What International Businesses Need to Know April 27, 2026 Deepfakes, Voice Cloning, and AI Impersonation: The Global Rules Are Already Here, and They Don't Agree April 23, 2026 DMCA Agent Requirements for Online Businesses April 21, 2026 Trade Secrets in the AI Economy: Why Businesses Need Stronger Protection Now March 31, 2026 Trademark Registration in Cuba: Why Companies Should Be Thinking Ahead March 18, 2026 Abandoned Trademark Blocking Your U.S. Trademark Application? Understanding TTAB Cancellations February 2, 2026 EU Expansion and the EUTM: Will Your EU Trademark Automatically Cover New Member States? December 22, 2025 How a Foreign Trademark Application or Registration Can Help You in the United States: Section 44(d) and Section 44(e) December 12, 2025 Registering a Trademark in Canada: What International Businesses Need to Know December 10, 2025 Negotiating Trademark Disputes: Protecting Your Brand Without Burning Cash December 8, 2025 Trade Secrets and How to Protect Your Most Valuable Information November 18, 2025 Ten IP Monetization Mistakes That Quietly Destroy Global Trademark Portfolio Value November 17, 2025 Registering Trademarks in Vietnam: What You Need to Know Leave a comment Cancel reply