Crypto Trademarks and China

Home | China Law Blog | Crypto Trademarks and China Crypto trademarks are a no-go in China. In line with the country's prohibitions on cryptocurrencies, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) will not register trademarks that describe crypto goods and/or services. Brands in the crypto space must be mindful of this reality when crafting brand and intellectual property rights protection strategies for China. China banned cryptocurrencies in 2021. Consequently, applications to register trademarks that describe crypto goods and/or services are being rejected by CNIPA. At first glance, these rejections would appear to be consistent with China's Trademark Law. Article 10(i)(7) prohibits the registration of trademarks "detrimental to socialist morality or customs, or having other unhealthy influences." Interestingly, however, CNIPA does not always cite Article 10(i)(7) when rejecting crypto trademark applications. In the case of one application rejected on both crypto and descriptiveness grounds, CNIPA did not cite Article 10(i)(7), but did cite the Trademark Law's prohibition against descriptive marks. We have also seen instances where CNIPA only cites the procedural sections of the Trademark Law. It is possible that CNIPA, or at least some of its examiners, do not view crypto trademarks as inherently violative of Article 10(i)(7), and instead apply a standalone prohibition against crypto. Perhaps conscious of the fact that at some point the authorities may decide to take a softer stance on crypto, CNIPA may not want to go so far as to label it detrimental. CNIPA will sometimes cite Article 10(i)(7), but in the cases we have seen so far, the application has also been rejected on deceptiveness grounds - and it may be that which triggers the Article 10(i)(7) concern. This all said, my experience in the public sector taught me not to overanalyze the actions of bureaucratic actors. The bottom line is that the trademark is not going to be registered, irrespective of how many and/or which Trademark Law articles are cited. As Deng Xiaoping said, "No matter if it is a white cat or a black cat; as long as it can catch mice, it is a good cat." With crypto brands aware of this landscape, they need to ensure that their goods and services descriptions are drafted in a way that makes them likely to pass muster for a China trademark. For one, this means avoiding terms such as "cryptocurrency". To be clear, the idea here is not to try to pull the wool over CNIPA's eyes. Rather, it is to avoid situations where Web3 technology and services that have applications that extend beyond crypto are defined too narrowly, in a way that deprives the brand of trademark protection. In this sense, brands should be particularly careful with Madrid applications. One of the benefits of national applications (that is, those filed directly with CNIPA) is that they allow trademark owners to tailor their applications to China's specific requirements. Avoiding China-specific restrictions on crypto trademarks is a textbook example of a situation where a brand would want to do that. Needless to say, as long as China's prohibition on crypto stands, no one should be getting into that business in China. Brands in the wider Web3 space, on the other hand, should take care to ensure that references to crypto do not jeopardize the protection of their trademarks that also (or exclusively) describe goods and/or services that are not related to crypto. Check Out Our China Law Services 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 AI, Internet, Web3, and Blockchain, Intellectual Property (IP) Related Posts September 15, 2026 Your AI-Drafted China Contract Says It Needs a Lawyer. Listen to It. September 11, 2026 Forensic Accountants in China Business Litigation: How True Numbers Can Tell the Wrong Story September 4, 2026 China NNN Agreement or Trademark Registration? You Usually Need Both September 1, 2026 AI Didn't Replace Lawyers. It Gave Us the 48-Page Contract. August 27, 2026 Do I Need a China NNN Agreement or a China Manufacturing Agreement? Usually Both. August 26, 2026 China’s New Overseas Investment Rules: Can Your Chinese Investor Actually Get the Money Out? August 24, 2026 International IP Protection for Startups: What to Protect and Where August 19, 2026 The Documents Are the International Deal August 19, 2026 China Supplier Fraud in Yiwu: Why We Recommended the Police, Not a Lawsuit August 17, 2026 China Trademark Registration: Why U.S. Companies Need More Than a Filing Agent August 10, 2026 Buying Expensive Equipment from China: Seven Questions to Answer Before You Pay August 7, 2026 DDP Shipping Risks: What Boise Cascade’s Guilty Plea Means for U.S. Buyers August 6, 2026 Protecting Your Artwork Internationally: What Artists Need to Do Before the Work Travels August 5, 2026 Your China Employee Signed the Vacation Policy. You Can Still Lose. July 29, 2026 The RedNote Contract Lesson for Companies Doing Business in China Leave a comment Cancel reply