Oct 27, 2025 | The Importance of Evidence of “Long-Term Use”

1. If the (Hong Kong) Intellectual Property Department or the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) accepts evidence of “long-term use” provided by a trademark applicant, the applicant can build a reputation and demonstrate that the trademark in the application is distinctive (Distinctiveness). Therefore, citing evidence of long-term use is extremely important.

2. Regrettably, many trademark applicants fail to provide “appropriate” evidence of “long-term use” to the Intellectual Property Department and/or the CNIPA, resulting in “insufficient evidence.” This is the sin of war.

3. Based on the author’s experience, the author believes trademark applicants sometimes make the following errors when providing evidence of long-term use:
Error 1
4. Evidence provided to demonstrate long-term use is not actually the trademark in the trademark application:

a) the above error means that the trademark in use is different, or even significantly different, from the trademark in the trademark application.
b) this error often occurs when the drafter of the evidence documents lacks communication with the client. often, the drafter simply copies information from the trademark applicant’s website and submits it without a second thought.
c) to resolve this discrepancy, the drafter needs to communicate closely with the trademark applicant. when collecting evidence, you must suit the remedy to the case.
Error 2
5. The evidence of long-term use provided, or a substantial portion of it, is irrelevant to the case:

a) this discrepancy often occurs when the drafter is unaware of or disregards the “trademark application date.”
b) this means that the drafter disregards evidence of use before or after the trademark application, submitting it regardless of whether it is justified or not. this deprives the relevance of the evidence of use. evidence generated after the “trademark application date” will not be considered.
c) to resolve this issue, the drafter will only need to be aware of this basic law or exercise caution in drafting.
Error 3
6. The evidence provided cites use of the trademark on goods that are not the same as the goods in the trademark application:

a) this error can also be considered a rookie mistake.
b) the required evidence must cite use of the trademark on the goods in the trademark application. if the goods using the trademark are not the same as the goods in the trademark application, then it does not basically count as long-term use of the goods in the trademark application.
c) furthermore, trademark applications may cover a large number of goods. if the applicant has never used certain goods in the trademark application, but there is a connection between the goods and the goods, such as the goods purchased by the same customers, this must be clearly stated in the grounds to establish the connection between the evidence of long-term use and the goods that have never been sold.

7. Errors 1, 2, and 3 above are not uncommon in reality. If a conscientious trademark agent is employed, they will communicate closely with the client, carefully collect evidence of use, and present and submit it to the Intellectual Property Department and CNIPA in an orderly manner in accordance with relevant laws.