Registered trade marks containing green claim wordings are likely to ensure consumer trust for the designated goods/services. Therefore, it is critical for the trade mark authority to carefully examine such trade marks to prevent misleading advertising.

In this article, Melanie Zhu of the MARQUES China Team discusses the current practice and criteria for examining such trade marks in mainland China, with a focus on the challenges and recent trends.

Definition of green claim trade marks

According to EU Directive 2024/825 of 28 February 2024, green claim trade marks include trade marks that contain words making generic environmental claims, i.e. ‘environmentally friendly’, ‘eco-friendly’, ‘eco’, ‘green’, ‘nature’s friend’, ‘ecological’, ‘environmentally correct’, ‘climate friendly’, ‘gentle on the environment’, ‘carbon friendly’, ‘carbon neutral’, ‘carbon positive’, ‘climate neutral’, ‘energy efficient’, ‘biodegradable’, ‘biobased’ or similar statements as well as broader statements such as ‘conscious’ or ‘responsible’ that suggest or create the impression of excellent environmental performance.

The aim of this directive is to ensure that environmental labels and claims are credible and trustworthy, which will allow consumers to make better-informed purchasing decisions.

There is no definition and no specific regulation concerning green claim trade marks in mainland China at this stage.

Current practice in mainland China

In accordance with the China Trade Mark Law (Article 10.1.7), Implementation Regulations, Trade Mark Examination and Adjudication Guide 2021, trade marks encompassing words that are likely to mislead the public about the function, quality, origin, effectiveness etc of the designated goods/services should not be granted. In this sense, we believe green claim trade marks should be regulated by this Article.

The CTMO (China Trade Mark Office) maintains the principle that trade marks should distinguish the origin of the goods/services without implying quality or effectiveness.

In this sense, the CTMO has become increasingly strict with trade marks containing green claim wordings, rejecting them on absolute grounds.

Even if applicants could provide evidence to prove the goods/services are environmentally friendly, the CTMO would still reject such green claim trade marks on the ground that it is beyond the CTMO’s examination scope and capacity to check and ensure the goods/services do have claimed features and effectiveness, and also beyond its capacity to inspect the goods/services in commerce to ensure they still have the claimed effective during the valid period of the registered trade marks.

Search findings

While it is challenging to determine the exact number of registered or rejected green claim trade marks due to the vast array of expressions in Chinese, we tried most popular and typical green claim words in both English and Chinese expressions, and summarize the findings for consideration:

eco-friendly and 环保 (eco-friendly in Chinese)

• Applications for the identical “eco-friendly” or “环保” were all rejected.
• There are around 50 registered marks encompassing “echo-friendly” in Class 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36, 39, 40, 41, 42.
• There are over 1100 registered marks encompassing “环保” in Class 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,11,12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45.

energy efficient/saving and 节能 (energy efficient/saving in Chinese)

• Applications for the identical “energy efficient/saving” or “节能” were all rejected.
• There are around 50 registered marks encompassing “energy efficient/saving” in Class 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 28, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 ,42 ,45.
• There are over 1400 registered marks encompassing “节能” in Class 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,11,12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45.

Sustainable and 可持续 (sustainable in Chinese), recyclable & 可循环 (recyclable in Chinese)

• Surprisingly, there are 5 registrations for the identical “Sustainable” and/or its corresponding Chinese in class 4, 9, 12, 18, 36, 38, as well as 2 registrations for the identical “recyclable” in class 1, 5 but none for identical “recyclable in Chinese” on the registrar.
• There are over 230 registered marks encompassing “sustainable” and over 20 registered marks encompassing “可持续” in various goods and services classes.
• There are fewer than 10 registered marks encompassing “recyclable” and also fewer than 10 registered marks encompassing “可循环/可再生” in various goods and services classes.

Green and 绿色 (green in Chinese)

• This is a tricky one, as “green” inherently refers to a kind of colour, but is now more and more used to describe the clean energy, pollution-free foodstuffs etc. This secondary meaning of “green” made it a sensitive word to be included in a trade mark. Though there are numerous registered trade marks that include “green” on the registrar, we have seen the CTMO began to reject applications for trade marks containing “green” in the classes of foodstuffs, energy and electric equipment in recent years

Observations and trends

Increasing stringency in trade mark examination. For the rejected applications for the trade marks composed of the above green claim wordings, it is unknown whether the rejections were due to being misleading (Article 10.1.7) or lack of distinctiveness (Article 11) as the refusal notifications are not made public.

Historical versus recent registrations. Almost all of the existing registrations composed of the above green claim wordings were granted at least eight years ago, while recent applications (either in English or in Chinese) were all rejected.

Lapse and Invalidation of green claim trade marks. Some existing registrations containing such green claim wordings were lapsed due to non-renewal, non-use cancellation or invalidation in recent years.

Decreasing registrations and global alignment. A noticeable trend is the decreasing number of registered marks containing these green claim wordings, indicating the CTMO is aligning with international standards to ensure that environmental claims are credible and not misleading.

Conclusion: caution needed

In mainland China, the examination criteria for trade marks containing green claim wordings have become more and more stringent in recent years, reflecting a commitment to prevent misleading consumers and stick to the fundamental function of trade marks.

While there is no specific regulation for green claim trade marks, the existing legal framework provides a basis for the CTMO to reject trade marks that may mislead the public about the environmental performance of goods or services.

Applicants should be cautious when developing new trade marks to avoid including the green claim wording, relying on marketing activities to deliver the environmental technology/performance of the products/services. This strategy ensures compliance with trade mark laws while effectively conveying the eco-friendly attributes of their offerings.

Melanie Zhu leads the trade mark team for Rouse International in Shanghai and is a member of the MARQUES China Team