Green Trademarks in China are Getting Red Lights

Home | China Law Blog | Green Trademarks in China are Getting Red Lights Green trademarks are running into red lights in China. Just about every application to register a mark that includes the word "green" is being rejected. Rumor has it that concerns over greenwashing are to blame, though given the opaque nature of the application process this cannot be confirmed. Greenwashing is the "practice of making unwarranted or overblown claims of sustainability or environmental friendliness in an attempt to gain market share." The use of words such as "green", "eco" and "sustainable" to describe products that are not in fact environment-friendly can be considered a form of greenwashing. China's Trademark Law prohibits the registration of deceptive trademarks. A trademark that greenwashes the underlying products can be considered deceptive. We suspect that deceptiveness concerns are behind the many rejections of green trademarks and these suspicions are shared by practitioners in China. Contrary to the practice in the United States, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) does not publish the notices it issues regarding specific trademark applications. In any case, notices to applicants tend to be somewhat terse, often leaving them to read between the lines. As a result, the motivations behind the rejections of specific applications to register green trademarks cannot be confirmed. We do know that CNIPA's American counterpart, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), is explicitly raising greenwashing concerns. In the case of some applications to register green trademarks, USPTO has required a disclaimer of the relevant terms, on deceptiveness grounds. Unfortunately, disclaimers are basically not an option in China, meaning that an outright refusal is the likely outcome. For brands whose products are in fact environment-friendly, they could try appealing rejections of green trademarks, presenting evidence of their eco bona fides. In many cases, however, demonstrating planet-friendliness may not be feasible. Plus, generally speaking CNIPA is not that open to substantive arguments over refusal grounds. Brands that have not yet committed to green trademarks should consider names that skirt these issues. As for those that have committed, they can consider other approaches. For example, if they are looking to enter the Chinese market, they can consider using a different name in China or focusing on their Chinese-language branding. They can also seek to register the graphic elements of their trademarks, such as logos. 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 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