We wish all of our clients, associates and friends around the world Happy Holidays and best wishes for the New Year 2026 - especially, health, happiness and success!

On 24 September 2025, the EUIPO Board of Appeal issued an interesting decision regarding the ground of opposition based on the earlier mark’s reputation (Article 8(5) EUTMR). For the following signs, the EUIPO upheld the opposition:

1. Background

The opposition against “Alten Kräuterfrau” was examined a first time by the Opposition Division on 21 December 2021. The owner of “Jägermeister” had based the opposition both on likelihood of confusion between the signs (Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR) and the existence of a reputation of their mark in Germany (Article 8(5) EUTMR). The opposition was originally rejected: although a remote conceptual similarity could be found, the signs were dissimilar. However, the Board of Appeal annulled this first decision and remitted the case back to the Opposition Division, stating that since there was a finding of a remote conceptual similarity between the signs, the Opposition Division should assess the further requirements of Article 8(5) EUTMR. On 3 January 2025, the Opposition division re-examined the case and this time decided to uphold the opposition on the ground that “Alten Kräuterfrau” would take unfair advantage of “Jägermeister”’s reputation.

2. The decision

The Board of Appeal confirmed the decision of the Opposition Division, with the following reasoning:

1. Existence of a reputation

The earlier mark “Jägermeister” possesses a reputation in Germany with regard to herbal spirits. This finding is backed by the provision of material showing that the owner of “Jägermeister”, who has been using the mark for the better part of 90 years, has a market share of 38% in the “Bitter” category in Germany, way ahead of all their competitors: the second largest manufacturer only has a market share of 15%.

2. Similarity and existence of a link between the signs

The Board agreed with the Opposition Division in finding that there was no visual and phonetic similarity between the signs, but that a remote conceptual similarity exists. This is due to part of the German public associating both signs with hunting: some will interpret the depicted male human head in the contested sign as that of a hunter, while the deer head shown in the older sign along with the term “Jägermeister” (translating to “master hunter”) evokes the hunt.

While only remote, this conceptual similarity is enough to warrant the application of Article 8(5) EUTMR. Combined with the earlier mark’s high degree of reputation and the resemblances in the overall arrangements of both signs (such as the use of the gothic font and similar colours), this creates an association between the signs.

3. Risk of injury

The fact that both signs are used on identical products targeting the same consumers and in the same channels makes it clear that “Alten Kräuterfrau” could profit from the attractiveness of “Jägermeister”. Consumers would easily believe the “Alten Kräuterfrau” products to be of the same quality as the “Jägermeister” products. Thus, the goodwill of “Jägermeister”, obtained through years of demonstrated efforts, would unduly be transferred to another undertaking.

4. Absence of due cause for use of “Alten Kräuterfrau”

The applicant may escape the opposition if there is “due cause” for them to use the contested sign. Here, the applicant argued that the younger sign merely adopted the appearance of a label for a typical German bitter. The Board found it unconvincing. Worse: this “traditional German style” was actually… mostly created by “Jägermeister”! This finding relies on the market share and long-standing use of “Jägermeister” for bitters in Germany. Therefore, copying this style cannot be seen as a due cause.

3. Comment LexDellmeier

When comparing the signs at hand, it is unlikely that many would believe the products concerned to originate from the same undertaking. Likewise, the idea that part of the German public would associate the “Alten Kräuterfrau” sign with the hunt seems relatively far-fetched.

Nonetheless, this decision illustrates that the smallest possible similarity between signs may be enough to uphold an opposition, as long as the earlier mark enjoys a strong reputation. It is also worth noting that in this instance, the marks were applied to identical goods, and this circumstance was explicitly given by the Board as a factor to identify a link between the signs. The decision may have been different if the goods were only similar.

Overall, trademark owners investing heavily in their brand will be pleased to see that the EUIPO favours such undertakings and rewards businesses that carefully grow and manage a good reputation for their products. In the specific field of German herbals, competitors will definitely think twice before trying to ride on the coattails of “Jägermeister” again.

Protecting Craft and Industrial Products: The EU’s New Geographical Indication (GI) Framework Effective December 2025

It may not seem obvious, but “Parma ham“ and “Champagne” share several important similarities. On the one hand, both are agricultural products. On the other hand, they are geographical indications. The latter can be protected legally as “Protected Designations of Origin” (PDOs) thanks to Regulation (EU) 2024/1143, which provides EU-wide protection of Geographical Indications for agricultural products, wines and spirits.

In contrast, there has been so far no protection for Geographical Indications for craft and industrial products on an EU-wide basis. This is set to change from December 1st, 2025, with Regulation (EU) 2023/2411, which provides for the protection of geographical indications for craft and industrial products at EU level.

Cosmetics vs Pharmaceuticals – Similar Goods?

The similarity of goods and services is always a decisive issue when it comes to trademark collision and infringement. Proceeding against an alleged trademark infringer requires not only the mark being identical or similar to a registered trademark, but also the goods and services need to be identical or similar. Not always it is clear whether or not there actually is sufficient similarity to establish trademark infringement. Further, the different decision-making bodies in the EU (and the national offices and courts as well) do not always take the same approach or come to the same conclusions. The EUIPO’s Boards of Appeal took a closer look at how similarity between “cosmetics” in Class 3 and “pharmaceuticals” in Class 5 – two classes, often opposing each other – are being treated at EU level and we would like to briefly summarize the findings to give you a better understanding of the approach(es).

(Source: Shutterstock, ID: 2294393873)

1. Legal Background

EU law provides that

• a trademark application shall not be registered if
  • there exists a likelihood of confusion between the application and an earlier trademark based on
  • an identity / similarity in the marks and
  • an identity / similarity in the goods and services for which both marks claim protection [Article 8(1)(b) EUTMR];
• goods and services are not automatically similar just because they fall into the same class of the Nice Classification;
• good and services are not automatically dissimilar just because they appear in different classes of the Nice Classification. [Article 33(7) EUTMR]

Furthermore, it is settled case law that

• in assessing the similarity of goods or services, all relevant factors relating to those goods and services need be taken into account [see EU Court of Justice in C-39/97 – CANON], inter alia
  • their nature,
  • their intended purpose,
  • their method of use,
  • whether they are in competition with each other or are complementary,
  • their distribution channels,
  • market practice and the usual commercial origin of the goods or services concerned, as perceived by the relevant public.
• before comparing any goods and services, it is necessary to define the scope of the particular category or item of goods or services in the relevant class of the Nice Classification. This is done by interpreting the terms used in the list of goods and services literally, taking into account their natural and usual meaning (dictionaries, understanding from a commercial perspective) as well as general considerations of the Nice Classification, its Explanatory Notes and definitions in other relevant EU regulatory acts.

For several years, it has been a declared aim of the EUIPO’s Boards of Appeal to provide guidance in EU case law, to enhance the consistency of decision-making practice in the EU and to improve the predictability of decisions and legal certainty in general. Regularly, decisions of the EU Court of Justice, the General Court and the Boards of Appeal are analyzed and discussed as to relevant case-law and trends on the topic.

The result is being made available to the staff of the Boards of Appeal and the public, but it is important to stress that it does not have any binding effect.

2. Pharmaceuticals vs Cosmetics

In one of its latest publications, the Boards of Appeal focused on the comparison between “pharmaceuticals” in the class heading of Class 5 and “non-medicated cosmetics and toiletry preparations” in the class heading of Class 3 of the Nice Classification (see Similarity between pharmaceuticals and cosmetics).

After comparing relevant case law, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. General category pharmaceuticals in Class 5 versus the general category cosmetics or specific cosmetics in Class 3 (except perfumery, essential oils)

• Consistent case law confirming that the goods are not dissimilar
• Specific degree of similarity treated differently (in decisions)
• General trend:
  • General Court: mostly low degree of similarity
  • Boards of Appeal: low to average degree of similarity
• PRACTICAL ADVICE to argue average degree of similarity:
  • Show overlap in purpose, distribution channels, end consumers, method of use and commercial origin and
  • prove that pharmaceuticals and cosmetics have a common commercial origin (manufactured by the same undertakings and/or sold under the same brand)

2. Pharmaceuticals with specific therapeutic indications for the treatment of the external part of the body in Class 5 versus the general category cosmetics or specific cosmetics in Class 3 (except perfumery, essential oils)

• General trend:  deemed similar to an average degree considering an overlap in purpose, end users, method of use, distribution channels and commercial origin

3. Pharmaceuticals with specific therapeutic indication other than for the treatment of the external part of the body in Class 5 versus the general category cosmetics or specific cosmetics in Class 3

• Consistent case law confirming dissimilarity

4. Pharmaceuticals in Class 5 versus perfumery in Class 3

• Consistent case law confirming dissimilarity
• Reasons:  no overlap in purpose, distribution channels and commercial origin
• BUT:  occasional findings of a low degree of similarity between pharmaceuticals in Class 5 and deodorants / essential oils in Class 3 (see specific case law in report mentioned above)

While facts and arguments will still need to be discussed in each individual case, the cited report of the Boards of Appeal gives a good understanding of the general approach of the EUIPO and the European Courts as regards similarity of certain items in Classes 3 and 5. We strongly recommend reviewing the report (see Similarity between pharmaceuticals and cosmetics) as it contains a lot of references to case law with further explanations and reasoning which can be used for your own argumentation.

Also, if you would like to discuss the similarity of goods and services in specific cases, you are always welcome to contact us either by phone at +49 89 55 879 870 or by email to info@lexdellmeier.com

Picture this: on a sunny morning, you peek into your mailbox (the real one, not your emails) and find a pretty envelope. As you reach for it with childish excitement, you ask yourself who had the lovely idea to send you a postcard from their summer vacation. Then you open it and realise it is a cease-and-desist letter from a lawyer. It turns out that you keep using their client’s songs in your Tik-Tok videos without authorization and they want you to stop “infringing their copyright”. Your disappointment is immeasurable, and your day is ruined. And your bank account potentially as well, since they also demand a hefty payment. If you are an influencer and would like to avoid this type of situation, this article is for you.

1. Be aware of the dangers of intellectual property infringement

What is “IP right infringement”?

In the context of IP, “infringement” refers to the use of another person’s IP rights without being duly authorized to use these rights. Since IP rights are exclusive, one needs to either get permission from the IP right owner to use it for a certain amount of time (licence agreement) or obtain property of the IP right from its owner (purchase agreement). To learn more about the most important IP rights (trademarks, designs and copyright), please refer to Part 1 of our guide for influencers (https://lexdellmeier.com/en/blog/guide-influencers-part-1-protecting-your-own-intellectual-property).

What do you risk in case of infringement?

IP rights are geographically limited to individual countries or regions, whose laws may provide for different sanctions. But overall, even in good faith, an influencer promoting fakes or using IP rights without due authorisation from their owners risks:

• Court orders prohibiting further unlawful use of the IP right (so-called “injunctions”)
• Payment of damages and legal fees
• For extreme cases: criminal charges (payment of fines, imprisonment for several years)

2. Do your research before posting: look for the existence of third party rights

Trademarks and designs:

• Before dropping names or showing logos in a post, ask yourself whether others have applied for trademarks or designs for the same;
• Worldwide databases such as TMView (for trademarks: https://www.tmdn.org/tmview/#/tmview) and the WIPO Global Database (for designs: https://designdb.wipo.int/designdb/en/) contain information on most registered rights and are accessible free of charge: run a brief search to see whether third party rights may be a problem;
• If you find results that worry you: inform the right owner of your intention and ask for their permission to use the right (in writing), or seek the legal opinion of a professional attorney to lift any doubts you may have regarding a sign’s availability.

Copyrights:

• Copyrights are obtained automatically and not registered (at least in most countries), so the only helpful databases will be those that list works that have fallen within the public domain or works that are shared under open licences (such as Europeana: https://www.europeana.eu): this content will be safe to use;
• Ask yourself whether the use you want to make of someone else's work falls within a copyright exception: for instance, in the EU, use of copyrighted content is allowed for the purpose of parody, or quotation for criticism or review. In such cases: do not forget to mention the source and author in your post (otherwise the exception may not apply)!;
• In establishing whether the work is not free to use and/or your post would benefit from a copyright exception, do not hesitate to ask for the opinion of a legal practitioner;
• Once you are certain that the post you are about to make would be infringing copyright, either contact the owner to obtain their authorisation, or find another idea.

3. Recommendation: Legal advice upfront

In general, it makes sense to invest some time and money into proper legal advice BEFORE you start a career as a (professional) influencer. Intellectual property rights and the assessment of the risk they may pose are tricky. Therefore, it is good to have a guideline and know some “ground rules” before posting, advertising etc.

For all questions you may have on this topic, please contact our dedicated colleague Pierre Gerber at p.gerber@lexdellmeier.com and info@lexdellmeier.com and we will arrange a 20-minute Teams call to discuss your specific questions or concerns. A first contact and overall input is generally free of charge.

New Name, Legal Check

Rebranding and Trademark Law – What You Need to Know When Changing Your Brand Name

Rebranding can be an exciting yet risky move for any business. Whether you are modernizing your image, merging with another company, or simply trying to distance yourself from a negative past, changing your brand name is a significant step. But while marketing and design often take centre stage in rebranding projects, the legal dimension – especially trademark law – is just as critical. A poorly managed brand transition can lead to infringement claims, lost brand equity, and expensive disputes.

Here is a guideline from a trademark law perspective when considering a rebrand – and where we can support you.

1. Why Trademark Law Matters in Rebranding

Your brand name is more than just a label – it is a legally protected asset. A registered trademark gives you the exclusive right to use your name (or logo) in connection with your goods or services. When you change that name, you may be walking into a legal minefield:

• Is the new name already registered by someone else?
• Does your new name look or sound too similar to an existing trademark?
• Are you at risk of being sued for trademark infringement?

Failing to address these questions early can derail your rebrand and cost your business dearly.

2. Conduct a Thorough Trademark Search

Before settling on a new name, conduct a full trademark clearance search. This involves more than a quick Google or domain check.

It is highly recommended to work with a trademark attorney for this process. They can spot potential conflicts that might not be obvious at first glance.

We can assist you with:

• Performing clearance searches in the territories of interest
• Providing our assessment as to the remaining risks
• Creating possible alternatives.

3. Assess the Risk of Confusion

Trademark infringement does not require identical names – it is enough if two marks are “confusingly similar.” This is assessed based on:

• Visual and phonetic similarity
• Similarity of goods or services
• Overlapping target audiences
• Marketing channels used

For example, changing your brand from “QuickFit” to “KwikFyt” might seem original, but courts may still find confusion if “QuickFit” is already protected.

4. Register Your New Trademark Early

Once a legally safe name has been searched and chosen, register it as a trademark as early as possible – ideally before you launch the new brand.

This is important for:

• Securing exclusive rights to the name
• Preventing others from registering it
• Gaining legal leverage in case of conflict.

We do of course assist our clients in filing and managing their trademark portfolios worldwide.

5. Do not Abandon Your Old Trademark Too Soon

One common mistake is to completely drop the old brand identity the moment the new one is launched. But that can cause legal and business issues:

• End of trademark protection: trademark protection is terminated in the moment the duration ends. Contrary thereto, products may be “phased-out”.
• Loss of brand equity: Especially if your old name still holds trust.
• Trademark lapse: If you stop using a trademark and do not renew it, it may become vulnerable to cancellation.
• Consumer confusion: Abrupt changes may confuse existing customers or weaken your brand’s legal distinctiveness.

Best practice: Keep both brands in parallel for a while. Use phrases like “formerly known as…” or “now [new brand]” during the transition period.

6. Update Legal Agreements and IP Assets

Once your new brand is live, make sure you update all relevant legal and business materials, including:

• Commercial contracts
• Licensing agreements
• Domain names
• Social media handles
• Packaging, signage, and advertising
• Trademark records with IP offices

Neglecting this step can cause inconsistencies, contract disputes, or even a loss of trademark rights.

7. Timing is key

Once the decision to rebrand is made, legal due diligence should start immediately.

Trademark clearance, registration and coordination with international offices can be time-consuming – and delaying these steps risks conflicts, delays or even forced renaming. Legal processes must run in parallel with creative and strategic planning.

Ideally, businesses should allocate at least 6 months, and up to 24 months for more complex, international brand changes.

Conclusion: Rebranding Is a Legal Project, Not Just a Marketing One

Rebranding is much more than picking a catchy new name and designing a fresh logo. It is a legal process with significant trademark implications. Failing to do your homework can put your new brand at risk before it even launches. Timing is key – early legal involvement helps ensure a smooth and secure rebranding journey.

We can help you to conduct proper trademark checks, provide legal advice, register your new brand early, and plan the transition carefully. That way, your rebrand can be a fresh start – not a legal headache.

You are always welcome to contact us for further information, either by email to info@lexdellmeier.com or by phone at +49 89 55 879 870.

SUMMER – FESTIVAL TIME – BUILDING TRADEMARK VALUE

Well over two months late for World IP Day, but still keen to talk about IP and music.

Per chance, I recently listened to an OMR podcast with Holger Hübner, one of the founders of the Wacken Open Air festival and I was surprised how focused he was on brand management and the implications it has. More than once he reiterated that “the brand takes precedence over everything.” What a great example of how Intellectual Property (IP) and music go hand in hand.

(Source: Shutterstock, ID: 2293214123)

1. Introduction

With all the music festivals taking place in summer, it becomes clear that the relationship between IP and music cannot be reduced to the name of a band or a song, but that it is much broader. It is about credibility, building assets, retaining your customer base and last but not least – on a personal basis – having a good time with old friends and making new ones. For those of you that are not familiar with the Wacken Open Air festival, let me give you a few facts about it.

2. The Festival

The Wacken Open Air Festival, or WOA, was founded by friends that could not get enough of heavy metal music and wanted to share that spirit with others. In the small town of Wacken located in the very north of Germany they were able to gather 500 likeminded people for their first festival in 1990. 35 years later, the event attracts over 80,000 heavy metal and rock fans from all over the world. The 2025 festival tickets were sold out fast – and long before it was announced that Guns N’ Roses were going to head the lineup.

The festival’s “holy ground” is an area of over 360 hectares of rural acker in Wacken which are farmed normally during the year – with electricity and telecommunication cables and even a beer pipeline buried deep in the ground to not affect the farm work and still cater the festival.

As you can imagine, 80,000 fans are not just challenging for the festival organizer, but also have a considerable impact on a small, rural community like Wacken with only about 2,100 inhabitants (see www.wacken.de). Overall, there are quite a few stakeholders that need to be taken into account when planning a festival of this size and each decision affects the festival and the brand build upon it.

3. The Brand

Referring to “the brand” is an understatement. The festival brand is backed by several registered trademarks led by

a. word marks like

• “Wacken Open Air” (e.g. DE 399 03 206) or
• “W:O:A” (e.g. DE 301 51 011 or EUTM 018354678),

b. mere figurative marks like

(e.g. DE 399 03 209),

c. word/device marks like

(e.g. EUTM 007360985)                                (e.g. EUTM 008934127)

The trademarks are used broadly on merchandise like clothing, headwear, towels, blankets, glasses, mugs, toys and much more. The festival even has its own Monopoly game:

(see https://festivalstore.wacken.com/products/w-o-a-monopoly)

But coming back to the OMR podcast with Holger Hübner… Hearing him emphasize several times that “the brand takes precedence over everything“ it became clear that every decision regarding the festival is made with a strong focus on the implications it has:

• Is it in favor of the brand? Does it enhance or endanger the brand?
• Does it have any advantage for the fans, for the heavy metal community?
• Is it sustainable? Does it allow the “holy ground” to stay as is – a rural acker?

If an offer is not at least meeting these criteria, it is being turned down – regardless of the monetary value it might have as the negative impacts on the brand could be significant.

Our firm is not representing the Wacken Open Air festival trademarks, but being a trademark attorney, listening to this podcast was very enlightening and encouraging as it showed firsthand the appreciation and value that trademarks have to brand owners. Being part of a professional community that helps the latter securing and enforcing their trademarks to ensure that all the brand awareness and brand management pays off, feels good.

Should you also have a trademark that you would like to legally protect to ensure that no one else takes advantage of or even harms your brand, you are always welcome to contact us for further information on trademark law, either by phone at +49 89 55 879 870 or by email to info@lexdellmeier.com.

Have you ever posted a video of yourself performing a little dance on TikTok? Or uploaded photos of your latest vacation on a sun-bathed island on Instagram? There is a good chance that you did, since more than 5 billion persons are currently social media users, which represents roughly 64% of the world population. If you post on social media regularly and receive payments for doing so by commercial partners, congratulations: you may call yourself an influencer! No matter what the haters say about it, your activity on social media is an actual business. The contents you create are valuable and therefore deserve protection. In this article, you will learn a few basics on how to protect your own intellectual property.

1. Acquire relevant intellectual property rights

Trademarks: Any sign you may be using to distinguish services you provide or goods that you sell from those of other businesses may be registered as a trademark. Examples:

• A specific name or pseudonym under which you post content
• A logo that you use in your videos, as your profile picture, on products you created and offer to buyers…
• A musical theme or a jingle that can be heard in your videos

Trademarks need to be registered and are only valid in the countries where they are registered. They allow you to prohibit others from using a similar sign with similar goods and services to those for which you claimed protection. This right lasts 10 years and can be renewed for 10-year periods.

Designs: The appearance of products (or parts of products) that results from their features, such as lines, contours, colours, shapes or textures may be protected through a design. They are valid for 5 years, renewable for periods of 5 years and with a maximum of 25 years.

Important: Registering and renewing trademarks and designs is possible both at a national level and for the whole EU. However, it implies paying fees to the relevant intellectual property offices. Unless you have an unlimited budget, you will have to devise a strategy (meaning: define which signs you need to protect, for what goods or services, and in which countries) if you want to secure efficient protection of your IP through these rights.

Copyright: This right protects all creative works, be it artistic, musical, literary or audiovisual, if the works express the author’s free and creative choices. It is generally obtained automatically after the creation of the work (meaning no registration is necessary) and stays valid for 70 years after the author’s death. A few examples of copyrighted works are:

• The music and lyrics that can be heard in a song
• The contents of a video
• Pictures or photographs (even memes !)
• If you are hiding behind a “virtual influencer”: the appearance and animations of your avatar

2. Enforce your rights against infringers

Trademarks, designs and copyright grant their owners an exclusive right. This means that no one else may use a registered trademark or design, or exploit a copyrighted work, unless the right holder allows it by granting a license. Making use of a protected sign or work without permission is called “infringement”. By way of court actions against infringers, IP right owners may claim damages and injunctions to stop any infringement.

Here are some important steps to follow for any influencer to protect their intellectual property:

• Stay alert: look out for any unauthorized use of your IP rights by third parties
• Save proof of any infringing behaviour: make screenshots, download any material where your trademark, design or copyrighted work appears without a license agreement in place
• Document your own work and date it (for instance with watermarks, witness testimonies or notaries that can confirm the “creation” of your copyright): this will allow you to prove ownership of a copyright and when this right started to exist
• Seek counsel with legal professionals: we can advise you on any matter pertaining to trademarks, design and copyright. Please contact us at info@lexdellmeier.com and p.gerber@lexdellmeier.com and we will arrange a 20-minute Teams call to discuss your questions free of charge.

3. Useful links

For more information, please visit the following links:

https://www.euipo.europa.eu/en/observatory/awareness/ideas-powered/ip-for-influencers  

https://commission.europa.eu/live-work-travel-eu/consumer-rights-and-complaints/influencer-legal-hub_en

IP Right Holders do better

Findings of the “Intellectual Property Rights and Firm Performance in the European Union” firm-level analysis report by the EUIPO (European Union Intellectual Property Office) and the EPO (European Patent Office) of January 2025

Background and Objective of the Study

This study investigates the impact of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) – including patents, trademarks and registered designs – on the economic performance of companies in the EU. It covers both large firms and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The goal is to highlight the strategic importance of IPRs in enhancing business growth, innovation, and competitiveness.

Key Findings

1. Higher Revenue per Employee

Firms that own IPRs generate:

• on average, 23.8% more revenue per employee than firms without IPRs.
• after controlling for variables such as sector, company size, and location, the revenue advantage increases to 41%.

2. Higher Wages

• Employees at IPR-owning firms earn 22.1% higher wages on average than those at firms without any IPRs.

3. Strong Impact on SMEs

• SMEs with IPRs perform significantly better, generating 44% more revenue per employee compared to SMEs without IPRs.
• However, only about 9% of SMEs in the EU own any form of IPR, compared to 49% of large companies.

4. Sector Distribution

Firms owning IPRs are more commonly found in:

• Information and Communication (14.8%)
• Manufacturing (14.2%)
• Scientific and Technical Services (10.7%)

5. Multiple IPRs = Greater Advantage

• Companies that own more than one type of IPR (e.g., both patents and trademarks) experience an even stronger positive impact on performance.

Conclusion: The Strategic Importance of IPRs for European Businesses

The 2025 study by the EUIPO and EPO clearly demonstrates that IPRs are not merely legal tools – they are key strategic assets that significantly enhance business performance, particularly in today’s highly competitive, innovation-driven economy.

While large firms more frequently register IPRs, the report highlights that SMEs benefit the most when they do so. SMEs with IPRs generate 44% more revenue per employee – a transformative figure for businesses operating with limited resources. Despite this, only 9% of SMEs currently hold registered IPRs. This gap represents a missed opportunity and highlights the urgent need for greater awareness, support, and access to IP systems for smaller firms.

Final Takeaway

Intellectual property rights are no longer optional for firms seeking growth—they are a strategic necessity. For both policymakers and business leaders, the message is clear:

• Encourage investment in IP
• Build support structures for SMEs
• Integrate IP strategy into core business planning

In a knowledge-based economy, the ability to create, protect, and leverage intellectual assets is a decisive factor for success – both at the firm level and for the broader European economy.

The full report is accessible under https://www.euipo.europa.eu/de/publications/firm-level-analysis-report-january-2025.

COMING UP ON 1 MAY 2025: AMENDMENTS TO EU DESIGN LAW

We recently held a webinar on the upcoming amendments to EU design law. To learn more about the new amendments, listen to our webinar recording which will be uploaded soon on LexDellmeier’s YouTube Channel at www.youtube.com/@lexdellmeier-intellectualp8494. Most changes will be applicable as from 1 May 2025, others will have to wait until 1 July 2026 when secondary legislation comes into force. Here is some practical advice on the current changes.

1. Background

After more than 20 years of successful design protection in the European Union, EU design law has been updated to meet the new challenges of the digital age and to better protect the rights of design holders while ensuring effective competition in the interest of consumers.

2. Practical Advice

While most changes in the EU Design Regulation (EUDR) will generally be applicable as from 1 May 2025, some amendments need further clarification – in particular with regard to technical and other formal requirements which have not yet been defined. As one of the main aims of the new changes to EU design law is to further harmonize the design laws between the individual EU member states and the EUIPO, these technical and other formal requirements have to be discussed and agreed on between the national design offices of the EU member states and the EUIPO. While this process has already been started, it will still take some time until consent is reached. Until then, we will – unfortunately – have to rely on the old provisions. For instance, we will most likely not know until the middle of 2026 which (mostly technical) means of representation the EUIPO will allow for new forms of designs. Thus, design applications including movements, transitions or other forms of animation will have to wait until 1 July 2026 at the latest until they can be applied for. But there are some other important issues to be aware of and to take into account even before 1 May 2025.

• Renewal

Check if any of your designs will be due for renewal before 1 November 2025. If so, we strongly recommend to check if you can save money by renewing the design(s) by 30 April 2025 as the latest. On 1 May 2025, the renewal fees will increase significantly. For instance:

•  
  • For the first (1^st) renewal of one (1) design, you will have to pay EUR 90.00 until 30 April 2025 and EUR 150.00 as of 1 May 2025.
  • For the forth (4^th) renewal of one (1) design, you will have to pay EUR 180.00 until 30 April 2025 and EUR 700.00 as of 1 May 2025.

IMPORTANT:  As of 1 May 2025, the renewal fees will be due on the date of expiry of the registration instead of on the last day of the month on which protection ends. We recommend to adjust your docket accordingly.

• Deferment of Publication

The design registration fee that has to be paid at the time of filing your design application will cover the (old) application and publication fees.

IMPORTANT:  If you would like to defer publication of your design application filed as of 1 May 2025 (deferment is possible for up to 30 months), you have to pay the official deferment fee at the time of application. If you request deferment, but do not pay the deferment fee, the EUIPO will reject your whole design application, not just the request for deferment of publication.

IMPORTANT:  If you request deferment of publication, your design will be automatically published at the end of the 30-months deferment period. If you would like to prevent your design from being published, you have to actively withdraw the application until 3 months before the end of the deferment period.

• New Design Protection Symbol

Enhance visibility of your design rights by using the new design protection symbol consisting of a D in a circle - like the C for copyrights and the R for registered trademarks!

Again, to learn more about the new amendments to EU design law, listen to our webinar recording which will be uploaded soon on YouTube at www.youtube.com/@lexdellmeier-intellectualp8494. In addition, you are always welcome to contact us for further information on the new EU design law, either by phone at +49 89 55 879 870 or by email to info@lexdellmeier.com