Class 46 readers may be interested to read the Boards of Appeal case-law research reports, which are available on EUIPO’s website here.

The reports result from discussions within the Consistency Circles and the General Consistency Meeting of the Boards of Appeal and reflect the views at the given date. They are working documents and should not be considered to have any binding effect on the Boards of Appeal.

All have been published since 2021.

There are eight reports on absolute grounds – the most recent of which covers “Descriptiveness of names of colours” – and 12 reports on relative grounds, with “The impact of animal depictions on the comparison of signs and the likelihood of confusion” being published in May this year.

There are also seven reports on designs, covering topics such as component parts of complex products, assessment of individual character, designer’s degree of freedom and the informed user.

Finally, there is one report under the heading “Procedure and Registry”, which covers res judicata.

Most of the reports are available in the five languages of EUIPO.

INPI, the French IP office, has published analysis of the first five years of administrative invalidity and revocation procedures in France.

The administrative procedures became available on 1 April 2020. The first applications came in straightaway and the first two decisions on the merits were published on 5 November 2020.

Fiver years on there have been almost 2,200 applications (an average of 440 each year) and more than 1,800 decisions (400 a year). About 60% of cases are invalidity applications and 40% revocation applications.

Microenterprises and SMEs have filed more than 35% of applications, closely followed by foreign companies. The most frequent targets of proceedings have been microenterprises and SMEs (38%) and private individuals (37%).

IP professionals assist applicants in just over 90% of cases: 51% of cases involve a lawyer, 41% an IP attorney and 7% no representative.

In “nearly 15” decisions, INPI has held that it does not have jurisdiction because of a pre-existing court dispute. Twice it has found an abuse of process by the applicant.

The majority of invalidity applications are based on relative grounds only (70%), with 20% based on absolute grounds only and the remaining 10% on both relative and absolute grounds.

About 60% of applications are based on several grounds of invalidity. Bad faith is cited in more than 20% of invalidity applications, either on its own or accompanied by a relative ground.

In revocation proceedings, lack of use is the ground most frequently cited. INPI has also received about 30 applications based on the ground that a trade mark has become a common name or has become liable to mislead the public.

The average duration of proceedings from receipt of application to decision is 8.5 months but cases that involve a hearing can take up to 17 months. About 30% of proceedings are terminated without a decision on the merits.

In 85% of decisions, the proceedings were recognised as totally or partially founded, leading to more than 1,000 trade marks being totally or partially cancelled.

In relative grounds cases, over 85% of cases related to infringement of trade mark rights are accepted, but only around 50% of those based on rights in company names.

On absolute grounds, more than a quarter of decisions have involved bad faith and 50% of these cases have been justified, compared to only 30% of applications based on other absolute grounds.

Only 4% of revocation applications have been dismissed outright, compared to 74% of proceedings being deemed fully justified and 22% partially justified.

More than half of decisions rule on costs, with the average amount awarded being €680.

INPI says the Cancellation Unit includes 10 full-time equivalent staff and a manager.

INPI states in its report: “There has been an increase in the number of voluminous files, potentially arising from long-standing disputes. These cases are complex because of the multiplicity of players and proceedings, and the growing volume of documents submitted for consideration. This may be a sign of the increasing acceptance of this tool by users and their confidence in these new administrative procedures.”

The information on administrative procedures is included in the 13^th issue of the INPI Law Journal, which is published in English several times a year. The INPI Law Journal is based on PIBD, which has been published in French by INPI since 1968. PIBD can be read online here.

EUIPO is encouraging IP professionals to join its pro bono support initiative. The initiative, which started in 2020, matches IP professionals and SMEs who need IP advice in their language.

So far, over 5,000 SMEs have requested support and a majority of them would recommend pro bono support to other companies, while professionals report a positive impact on their client portfolio and personal satisfaction.

Professionals volunteer from one to four hours of IP advice per SME on average. They can choose support topics, the number of SMEs they want to assist and the duration of participation.

In general, professionals advise SMEs from their own country.

According to EUIPO: “Many describe the experience as rewarding, both personally and professionally, with opportunities to expand their networks, gain insights into SME challenges, and contribute meaningfully to Europe’s innovation ecosystem.”

Find out more about the pro bono support initiative on the EUIPO website here.

You can now book a place at the rescheduled roundtable discussion with Italian judges, representatives of the Italian Patent and Trade Mark Office, members of the Italian and EUIPO Boards of Appeal and industry representatives.

The meeting will take place on Thursday 2 October 2025 at the OFF/OFF Theatre in Rome and will be conducted in Italian.

This one-day conference is part of the MARQUES Meet the Judges series and will focus on the analysis of topical Italian and European trade mark case-law and administrative decisions and appeal judgements. It will cover topics including:

• proof of use
• protection of well-known trade marks, including heritage brands
• showing reputation and acquired distinctiveness through market surveys
• patronymic trade marks
• how to deal with gaps between market realities
• the restrictive examination practices for non-conventional signs as trade marks

The accreditation of this Symposium for the purpose of the professional training credits has been granted by the Italian Ordine dei Consulenti di Proprietà Industriale and the Ordine degli Avvocati of Rome.

Registration costs €325 (MARQUES members) or €450 (non-members). A buffet lunch and post-conference drinks reception are included.

Find out more, view the full programme and register online on the dedicated page on the MARQUES website.

MARQUES has submitted a response to the initial report on the review of the UDRP, which was conducted by the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center and the Internet Commerce Association.

The initial report was published in May this year and reported on the Class 46 blog here.

The MARQUES response was prepared by members of the Cyberspace Team. Several MARQUES members were also among the group of experts who examined the UDRP to identify improvements.

In its submission, MARQUES welcomes the initial report, saying: “The UDRP is the only cost-effective, proven mechanism for tackling cross-border trade mark infringement in the domain name system. MARQUES hopes that the ICANN community will take the Final Report by WIPO as the framework for review.”

MARQUES also shared some short comments on points of most importance to its membership. These covered issues including the scope of the UDRP, dissenting panellists, loser-pays, an appeals process with three-person panels, and standardised requirements and performance reviews for all panellists.

MARQUES plans to submit a further response to ICANN when the final report is submitted. This is expected to be later this year.

You can read the MARQUES submission on the Position Papers page of the MARQUES website.

WIPO has announced the winners of the Global Awards 2025, the fourth time the Organisation has celebrated visionary entrepreneurs who are using IP to scale their businesses and to deliver meaningful social and economic contributions.

The winners were announced by WIPO Director General Daren Tang during the WIPO Assemblies of Member States in Geneva.

The 10 winning SMEs and startups were selected from more than 780 applicants from 95 countries. The winners receive benefits including mentoring, publicity, recognition and sponsorship to attend events in Geneva.

The 2025 winners are:

• Health: SME: Hummingbird Bio, Singapore, antibody therapeutics; Startup: Glovatrix, India, sign-to-speech gloves
• Environment: SME: Carbfix, Iceland, CO₂ mineral storage; Startup: Urban Inventors, Sri Lanka, anti-flood drain system
• Agri-food: SME: PhageLab, Chile, antibiotic alternatives for livestock farming; Startup: Planetary, Switzerland, mycoprotein fermentation tech
• Creative industries: SME: ClicknClear, United Kingdom, music rights licensing; Startup: CodeGream, Republic of Korea, 3D product showcase
• ICT: SME: Unitree Robotics, China, advanced robotics; Startup: Quinas Technology, United Kingdom, next-gen memory chips

WIPO also announced two special awards:

• Best Woman Entrepreneur 2025: Edda Aradóttir, CEO of Carbfix (Iceland), whose visionary leadership and commitment to diversity stand out alongside her company’s efficient use of IP.
• Best Youth Entrepreneur 2025: Aishwarya Karnataki, CEO of Glovatrix (India), whose purpose-driven leadership inspires beyond her invention.

Read more about the WIPO Global Awards 2025 on WIPO’s website here. The photo shows a screenshot from the page.

Investment in data, software, brands and other IP-backed assets grew three times faster in 2024 than investment in physical assets, according to a new report by WIPO and Luiss Business School.

According to the report, published today (9 July), the United States had the highest absolute level of intangible asset investment while Sweden was the most intangible-asset-intensive economy.

India saw the fastest growth in intangible investment from 2011 to 2022 of 6.6%, while intangible investment in Brazil surged by 14% in 2024.

This is the second edition of the World Intangible Investment Highlights. It found that in 2024 intangible asset investment across 27 high- and middle-income countries grew by about 3% in real terms.

Overall investment in intangibles grew from $7.4 trillion in 2023 to $7.6 trillion in 2024. It has grown at a compound annual growth rate of about 4% between 2008 and 2024, while tangible investment has grown by just 1% a year.

The report also showed that intangible investment constituted nearly 14% of GDP in 2024, compared to 11% for tangible investment.

Announcing the report, WIPO Director General Daren Tang said: “We're witnessing a fundamental shift in how economies grow and compete. While businesses have slowed down investing in factories and equipment during uncertain times, they're doubling down on intangible assets – IP, AI, data, software, know-how and others.”

He added that the trend has “profound implications” for policymakers.

The report spotlights the types of investments driven by the boom in artificial intelligence. “The sustained rise in intangible investment reflects its critical role in driving competitiveness and productivity in today’s economy. This shift is particularly evident in the age of AI, where economic growth depends on combined investments in software, data, skills and organizational capital,” said Cecilia Jona-Lasinio, Professor, Luiss Business School and co-author of the report.

Read more and watch a video on WIPO’s website here. The illustration shows figure 1 from the report.