In recent years, some brand-breeders have played “foreign trademarks, domestic betting”。
The promoters repeatedly search on electric power platforms such as amazon, ebay and wal-mart to screen vendors whose sales are stable and growing rapidly and to register their overseas trademarks as domestic trademarks in china in bulk and then ask them for high licence or transfer fees。
Some sellers' overseas trademarks, after being held in the country, have been claimed for trademark transfer fees ranging from 100,000 to 280,000, and if the seller does not agree, the promoter will “calculate” the seller's goods at customs。
The regulatory authorities have responded to the confusion in the trademark industry。
At the end of 2025, the standing committee of the national people's congress adopted the revised trademarks act (hereinafter referred to as the revised act) for the first time, which is expected to be more effective in curbing the misbehaviour of trademarks。
According to the revised draft, acts such as “no use after registration, long-term accumulation of arbitrage” would be prohibited. Trademarks must serve real production and actual operations and not be used as a means of profit for repeated transfers, complaints and claims。
The revised draft would be tantamount to a heavy punch for a “marked assassin” in a betting business, while it would be good news for a cross-border power dealer who was doing business on amazon and ebay。
01.
It's gonna be over for the brand players
In recent years, a number of foreign trademarks of cross-border sellers have been taken in the country, with united states trademarks being particularly frequent, causing many sellers to suffer losses。
One seller, after registering a trademark in the united states, “forgot” to register the corresponding trademark in china, as a result of which his united states trademark was registered by a professional apostasy in fujian. The promoter registered dozens of trademarks and placed them under intensive “defence”. Although the promoter agreed to transfer the trademark, the price was up to $280,000。
In recent years, foreign branding has been processed and standardized by some companies。
For example, a company registers in bulk in the country brand trademarks for amazon fever, covering items such as clothing, electronics, cosmetics, etc. Most of the sellers to whom these trademarks correspond have already made steady sales on platforms such as amazon, even on the best seller list。
After the trademarks were taken out, the company went to customs to file a complaint. If the seller's goods are reported by them or found by customs, they are deemed to be in violation, resulting in the interruption of the shipment。
A seller was found to have violated a “mark” when the goods were shipped by customs. The customs sent an e-mail to the promoter, who responded to the e-mail, confirming that “its trademark had been violated” and providing a 20,000 dollar bond to the customs to seize the seller's cargo。
The seller had to communicate with the promoter. In the end, the wager issued a settlement amounting to tens of thousands of dollars, while the seller's value was just thousands. Even if the amount is not equal, there is a risk of being fined if the seller chooses not to reconcile。
At this point, the initiative is no longer in the seller's hands. In order to avoid the seizure of goods and the imposition of fines, many sellers can only pay high authorization or transfer fees in exchange for the release of goods。
According to industry analysts, it is likely that the trademarks will be collected by the mark-raiders on the basis of the amazon bsr (bestseller) list, confirming that the trademark owners have a certain amount of sales on the amazon and are then registered in bulk, with a good return to be paid for only a portion of the pledge. On the contrary, when sellers have a small sales volume or have no potential for higher sales, they generally do not pay to register。
Today, the industry is becoming so fragmented that it attracts the attention of the authorities concerned。
At the end of 2025, the trademarks act (revised) was first considered through the standing committee of the national people's congress. This amendment to the trademark law is a comprehensive system change。
The core change in the trademarks act (revised draft) is the remodelling of the value orientation of the trademark, and the “real use” of the trademark will be a prerequisite for its survival. Cross-border electricity vendors may note several important messages in the trademarks (revised) act:
1. If the subject of the application for the trademark is not intended for actual use and clearly exceeds the requirements of the normal production business, it will not be registered. This means that the passages that used to rely on bulk applications, first pits, retransfers and claims were blocked and the trademarks had to revert to this fundamental attribute of “real business”。
2. Combating malicious actions: if a trademark action is instituted in bad faith, it shall be punishable by law and civil liability shall be incurred for damage caused。
In recent years, a number of maliciously charged trademarks, such as the “tree ripe” “twilight zero”, have also been declared null and void. This means that the national intellectual property trademark office has been increasingly combating the phenomenon in the industry。
The revised draft improves the withdrawal mechanism for trademarks with regard to their “registration and light use”: once the registered trademark has become a generic name (e. G. Aspirin, originally a trademark, is now a generic name) or for three consecutive years it has not actually been used for no valid reason, the trademark administration of the state council may, on its own initiative, revoke the trademark in accordance with the law. This change will effectively reduce the “zombie trademark” and “storage of trademarks” and allow some trademarks to exit the market in a timely manner rather than to occupy public resources for a prolonged period。
Iii. The regulatory agenda also points to the trade-marked component of the problem: the revised draft expressly provides for greater regulation of the trademark agent industry, for malign competition, irregularities, and assistance in the collection of malicious bets, trademarks, etc., by reducing grey operating space by increasing the cost of violating the law in order to guide the proxy market towards compliance。
The revised draft, once in force, would act as a “block” for cross-border electric operators. When trademarks are no longer frequently used as tools for claims or arbitrage, sellers are able to better focus on products and services, and it is also possible to settle trademarks into sustainable competitive advantages and assets and to achieve real branding。
Photo from flickr by flickr user.
19,000 trademarks have been checked and a cross-border sale of trademarks or will be invalidated
The role of trademarks is significant, often involving a whole body. In addition to the issue of malicious bets, a number of pits are also used by cross-border electric operators when commissioning agents to register overseas trademarks。
Recently, the united states patent and trademark office (uspto) initiated a large-scale trademark review operation against an intellectual property service in shenzhen, which involved 3c, home, clothing, and other cross-border electrical products。
According to uspto, the agency did not have the qualifications to practice as an american lawyer, but submitted over 19,000 proxy trademark documents suspected of forgery of the lawyer's signature, multiple sharing of uspto accounts, false use statements, mailing address, etc. As a result, over 15,000 united states trademark applications or registration records have been included in the review。
Of these, 3,361 active trademarks, currently in a “non-terminal status”, submitted by the service provider for registration between 2009 and 2020, have been placed on the priority review list, and the right holders are required to submit an effective and compliant written response by 26 february 2026, otherwise the trademarks risk being directly invalidated。
In response to the above-mentioned violations, the uspto may or will permanently prohibit the company involved and its employees, agents, from submitting to the uspto any trademark-related documents; cancel all material previously submitted by it and remove the corresponding contact information from the official database; suspend the uspto account related to the incident and block the associated payment credit card; terminate all applications under review; and at the same time reopen the review process for registered trademarks that have been approved, which means that some of the united states trademarks that have been certified may also be directly invalidated。
This regulatory action will result in significant losses for a group of cross-border electricity vendors。
These cases involve a large number of china sellers ' trademarks that have already been registered in the united states of america, such as the mainstream electric power platforms in amazon and ebay, and that may have withdrawn the seller's brand filing, or even branded the shop as “brand abuse”, and may have triggered a risk of multi-store linkage review or closure. Once the trademark has been officially revoked by uspto, the seller will lose its legitimate brand defence base in the united states market and become more vulnerable to abuses, vending, etc。
Even if the seller chooses to reapply the united states trademark, it will devote a great deal of time and effort to it, and it may also encounter conflicts over the application, affecting the continuous operation of the brand。
If the seller can prove that it has no subjective intent, such as fraud or infraction, a formal written complaint may be filed with uspto through a lawyer with united states professional qualifications, by 26 february, in order to seek retention of the trademark or to mitigate the loss。
The incident also sounded alarms for other cross-border sellers, who should check their trademarks as soon as possible and take urgent responses if necessary。
On the one hand, through the uspto network of officials or by entrusting united states licensed lawyers to confirm whether the trademark is related to this risk list and to verify the brand status of cross-border platforms simultaneously. If the trademark is in the range of risk and has been filed, it should be assessed whether it has been withdrawn proactively in advance in order to avoid triggering further penalties on the shop from the platform; at the same time, it may proceed to resubmit the trademark application in the form of a “same name”, prepare authentic and verifiable evidence of use and set aside a window for the replacement of the old trademark。
In addition, vendors need to check the authenticity and compliance of past trademark applications and re-examine the cooperating intellectual property services. Before cooperating, it is essential that the other party clearly provide the full name of the united states practising lawyer and the number of the state bar association and verify the qualifications through official channels; if the trademark in question has been authorized to other shops, the authorization should first be lifted to prevent further risk。
It is worth noting that this is not the first time that uspto has punched. As early as august 2025, uspto had concentrated on the cancellation of more than 420,000 problematic trademarks. This focus on agency management has once again demonstrated that the operation of cross-border sellers requires special emphasis on trademark compliance, legitimacy and the reduction of unnecessary losses. (man/blue sea billion)
Part of the data is based on a sample of surveys and studies; website access, sales data will fluctuate over time for information purposes only。
