Japan embraces non-traditional marks

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Japan embraces non-traditional marks

In yesterday’s Japan Patent Office (JPO) User’s Meeting, representatives from the JPO provided INTA Annual Meeting registrants with an update on the how the Office is handling non-traditional marks.

The latest amendment to Japan’s Trademark Act allows for the registration of non-traditional marks. Since the new rules came into effect on April 1 this year, the JPO has received applications for 248 color marks, 194 sound marks, 117 position marks, 45 motion marks and three holograms.

The JPO representatives explained that the 607 applications they have received are more than they had originally expected and likely reflect pent-up user demand. The Office has a team especially tasked with examining these marks, but expects that it may take slightly longer to examine these applications, at least initially.

Applicants need to be aware of the specific requirements for each type of mark. For example, applicants for sound marks can provide an audio file for the mark, but the file must be submitted on a CD-R or DVD-R, be in the mp3 format, and must be no larger than five megabytes. Applicants may only submit one file for each mark.

When examined, sound marks will be evaluated for both the sonic elements as well as any lyrical elements.

Similarly, applicants for motion marks may submit a series of pictures that serve as frames showing how the mark moves. The JPO will accept up to 99 frames depicting the mark’s movements. These frames, rather than being evaluated individually, will be considered as a whole mark.

Distinctiveness will be an especially important issue for non-traditional marks. The JPO representatives said that single color and color combination marks are generally considered non-distinctive, although applicants may establish distinctiveness through use. In fact, the JPO has recommended that this may be the likeliest way to secure such a registration.

However, the test will be very stringent. The evidence establishing proof of prior use must be practically identical to the registration; even small differences would likely lead the examiner to find that there was no distinctiveness established by prior use.

As of yesterday, no non-traditional marks have been granted, but the JPO representatives said that they hope to be back next year with an update on how the office is handling these new applications.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

With rankings for Western Europe set to be published on June 25, we sat down with our research lead to find out what practitioners and law firms can expect
Peter O’Sullivan, a professional services executive, says he is looking forward to helping Pearce IP become the leading life sciences firm in Australia and New Zealand
Matteo Di Lernia, advocate at LCA Studio Legale, unpicks the CJEU’s ruling in M.M. Ristorazione v Villa Ramazzini, including its impact on litigation strategies
Leaders at IP boutique say the decision to pursue sponsorless partnership with the specialised investment arm of a private equity firm comes at a time of ‘profound transformation’ in the profession
Patrick Zhang, formerly of Atlassian and TiVo, will become Via’s vice president of licensing and commercial strategy, tasked with helping expand client partnerships and licensing deals
IP services firm says new platform will cut patent portfolio analysis from months to minutes and optimise monetisation efforts
New role for the High Court judge will leave a gap for an IP specialist judge at the first instance
Laura Achával, founder of Achával IP in Argentina, shares how an evolving vision led her to launch her own practice
Monetisation is standing at the forefront of patent development, and one firm says AI is increasingly being deployed
Data centres are being built across the US, prompting patent disputes, but Texas’s thriving tech industry and patent-ready courts make the state particularly ‘ripe’ for litigation
Gift this article