Mexico: Proven commercial use required for trademarks to achieve acquired distinctiveness
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Mexico: Proven commercial use required for trademarks to achieve acquired distinctiveness

Sponsored by


On August 10, 2018 several modifications to the Mexican Industrial Property Law entered into force, resulting in some new IP figures being recognised in Mexico.

One of the new legal concepts included in the Law is 'acquired distinctiveness,' more commonly known as 'secondary meaning', which allows the registration of trademarks that can be considered as not initially distinctive, but owing to their commercial use have acquired distinctiveness.

However, these modifications still need to be complemented with regulation and are yet to be published in the Official Gazette.

In light of this there are no clear guidelines to determine the evidence required to support an application for a trademark filed based on acquired distinctiveness, and so it is not clear how The Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI) will examine these applications when filed.

In order to be able to demonstrate that a trademark has acquired distinctiveness it is necessary to prove that it has been used in the market and that consumers recognise the trademark in relation to the goods and/or services that it distinguishes. This is to ensure that the trademark complies with its main requisite, i.e. that it is sufficiently distinctive to enable its goods/services to be distinguished from others in the market.

Factors that can support the distinctiveness of the trademark in the market include:

  • surveys;

  • the date of first use of the mark in Mexico;

  • the period of time of continued use and advertisement of the trademark in Mexico;

  • the volume of sales of the goods/services identified with the trademark during the last three years.

In any case, until the regulations to the industrial property law are published in the Official Gazette, it will be necessary to meet with examiners to determine whether or not this evidence is sufficient to obtain a favourable resolution from the authorities.


Wilma Caraza


Pedro Luis Ogazón No 17

Col San Angel

01000 México DF

Tel: +5255 53 22 30 00

Fax: +5255 53 22 30 01

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The court criticised Oppo’s attempts to delay proceedings and imposed a penalty, adding that the Chinese company may need to pay more if the trial isn’t concluded this year
Miguel Hernandez explains how he secured victory for baby care company Naterra in his first oral argument before the Federal Circuit
The UPC judges are wrong – restricting access to court documents, and making parties appoint a lawyer only to have a chance of seeing them, is madness
The group, which includes the Volkswagen, Seat and Audi brands, is now licensed to use SEPs owned by more than 60 patent owners
Managing IP’s Max Walters appeared on the latest episode of ‘Two IPs in a pod’, a regular podcast hosted by the UK patent attorney body, to discuss AI, awards and more
Sources at law firms say they have spent more than three years waiting for IP regulations and explain how the delay is affecting their business
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Managing IP will host a ceremony in London on April 11 to reveal the winners of the EMEA Awards 2024
Lawyers reveal what trends they have noticed in the Western District of Texas and the advice they have been giving clients as a result
Concerns over the EU’s proposed SEP Regulation are based on little empirical support, say Benno Buehler and Kilian Mueller of Charles River Associates
Gift this article