By Joy Dong
In a recent decision, the Beijing High People’s Court ruled in favor of Miyake Design Studio, a renowned Japanese design house, affirming that its minimalist grid-pattern symbol had acquired distinctiveness through extensive use. As a result, the mark was deemed eligible for trademark protection on goods where it had gained recognition, such as handbags and wallets.
This case marks a meaningful development in how Chinese courts approach abstract geometric designs in trademark law, offering valuable insight for both domestic and international brands that rely on pattern-based visual identity.
Legal Question: A Mere Pattern, or a Brand Identifier?
The mark in question is a minimalist square design composed of a 5x5 grid of four right-angled isosceles triangles. Visually refined yet seemingly simple, the design was initially registered under Class 18 for goods including handbags, wallets, umbrellas, and raw leather materials.
However, a third party challenged its validity, arguing that the mark lacked inherent distinctiveness and violated Article 11(1)(3) of China’s Trademark Law.
This provision prohibits the registration of signs that are purely decorative, functional, or commonly used unless the applicant can demonstrate acquired distinctiveness through extensive use: that is, the public now recognizes the sign as indicating the source of goods.
Turning Point: Usage Matters as Much as Design
The court held that while the design itself lacked inherent distinctiveness due to its repetitive and decorative nature, Miyake Design Studio had used it so widely and consistently on core products like bags and wallets that consumers had come to associate the mark with a specific commercial origin.
Through substantial evidence, including advertising, sales records, and consumer recognition, the studio proved that the mark had acquired distinctiveness through use, thereby justifying its registration for core product categories. However, the court found no such evidence for umbrellas, furniture leather, or furs, and thus partially invalidated the mark for those categories.
Why This Case Matters
1. Courts Recognize “Design as Brand” With the Right Evidence
In fashion, beauty, and consumer goods, many brands lean on simple patterns or textures to build brand identity. For overseas companies, this case sends a positive signal: even a mark that appears too basic or decorative can gain trademark protection in China if backed by sufficient usage and market recognition.
This opens a path for brands that rely on visual identity without traditional logos or words to secure trademark rights for their unique aesthetic.
2. A Shift in China’s Approach to Non-Traditional Marks
Historically, Chinese trademark authorities and courts have been conservative about distinctiveness, often rejecting abstract or decorative symbols. But this ruling reflects a more flexible, usage-oriented standard: distinctiveness is no longer viewed as static or inherent, but as something that can evolve through market presence and consumer perception.
This trend aligns China with international jurisdictions like the EU and U.S., where "secondary meaning" is a recognized path to protection.
3. Strategic Takeaways for Brand Owners
Evidence is Key: If your design lacks inherent distinctiveness, you must provide ample evidence of consumer recognition, advertising investment, and long-term use.
Tailor Strategy by Product Category: A design may be distinctive on handbags but not on umbrellas. Fine-tune your protection strategy by category.
Registration Isn’t the Endgame: Even after registration, failure to maintain distinctiveness or provide usage evidence may result in partial or full invalidation.
Final Thoughts
This case is a promising sign that China’s IP system is maturing, broadening protection beyond traditional logos to include brand identifiers built through consistent market presence. For foreign brands hoping to secure rights for non-traditional marks in China, long-term use, brand-building, and diligent evidence collection are essential.
As China’s trademark regime evolves, brands must stay agile, preserving records of use, adjusting filing strategies, and proactively defending their visual identity.
Whether you're a global fashion giant or a cutting-edge local designer, understanding how “acquired distinctiveness” works is key to safeguarding your brand’s visual DNA and ensuring its longevity.