A company selling household goods registered its trademark only in China. After its products reached Europe and the US through cross-border e-commerce and foreign trade channels, an overseas party squatted the identical mark in the target countries, and the company was hit with infringement complaints and listing takedowns. It ultimately combined opposition and negotiation, spending about two years to recover rights in its core markets. (An analysis based on common industry scenarios; it does not refer to any specific case.)
How It Happened
The company registered a Chinese-English combination trademark in China and, after years of operation, opened European and US stores on cross-border e-commerce platforms, with sales gradually ramping up. Believing it "already had a Chinese trademark," it never registered in the target countries.
After its sales entered the top ranks of the category, an overseas company filed word marks identical to the company's brand in the US and the EU, enrolled the brand on the platform using its pending US application, and then counter-complained that the company's store was "infringing its trademark." Multiple listings of the company were taken down and the account received infringement warnings.
Where It Went Wrong
- Mistaking a domestic registration for global protection: trademark rights are territorial; a Chinese registration has no effect whatsoever in Europe or the US;
- Thinking about layout only after sales took off: squatters target exactly the platform best-seller lists — the better you sell, the greater the danger;
- No local rights, no say on the platform: Amazon recognizes locally registered trademarks when handling infringement complaints, so the squatted party became the "infringer" instead.
The Relief Process
The company pursued three parallel paths:
- Opposition interception: the squatter's EU application was still in the publication period, so the company opposed it on grounds of prior use and bad-faith squatting, blocking its grant;
- US response: the squatter's US application had already registered; after evaluation the company chose to negotiate with it while collecting its own earlier sales evidence in preparation for a possible cancellation proceeding;
- Negotiated buyback: the other side demanded a high price; after multiple rounds of negotiation, the company acquired the US trademark at a cost far exceeding the registration fee.
The whole process took about two years, and direct spending (opposition fees, attorney fees, the assignment price) was dozens of times the original registration fee — not counting lost sales while the listings were down.
Lessons
- Trademark before market: once the brand name is set and you decide to go global, registration in core countries should be simultaneous with — or even ahead of — opening stores;
- A low-cost defensive checklist: the US, EU, UK and Hong Kong are the minimum configuration for cross-border sellers; the total cost of these four registrations is far below a single squatting relief effort;
- The publication period is the golden window: monitor official gazettes in each country regularly; opposing during the publication period is the cheapest interception with the highest success rate;
- Preserve evidence of use: earlier sales records serve both as platform appeal material and, in some countries (such as the US), as a substantive weapon against squatters.
If you need the process above handled for you, you can book the registered-agent US trademark registration service at MyTMBee, with full assistance from document preparation to filing follow-up.