Brazil: Performing trademark clearance searches without experts can lead to problems

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

Cookies Settings

Brazil: Performing trademark clearance searches without experts can lead to problems

Sponsored by

daniel-400px.png

Performing trademark clearance searches should always be the first step taken prior to filing a trademark application, as they are an effective way of preventing legal risks before launching a brand.

A few years ago, these searches were solely performed by experts in intellectual property law, but nowadays, there are lots of search tools that are exclusively using artificial intelligence (AI) to provide less costly and expedited search results.

Although AI is here to stay, why should companies still seek local advice?

While doing business in Brazil, local knowledge is key in many situations due to the Brazilian legal system's peculiarities. This also applies to trademark clearance searches.

To better illustrate, a brand that in the same circumstances would have no problem receiving registration in the US or throughout Europe, might be rejected in Brazil either because of our PTO's contradictory decisions or based on absolute grounds. For example, if a phrase or expression makes sense in any language, there is a high chance Brazil's PTO will reject it as being descriptive or a mere slogan. Also, one of the reasons Brazil's PTO makes contradictory decisions is that its level of tolerance of coexistence varies depending on the class in which the application is filed.

All these hindrances can be avoided by simple suggestions from an expert, such as filing the mark together with a house-mark or combined with other distinctive elements.

In a connected world, companies are interested in having a unique identity globally and time is of the essence. We therefore encourage the use of AI to perform searches, as it evidently reduces costs and provides speedy results. Nonetheless, in jurisdictions with their own idiosyncrasies, using AI engines should not rule out an expert analysis, as local know-how may completely change a search report and advice from the beginning.

helayel.jpg

Livia Helayel


Daniel Legal & IP Strategy

Av. República do Chile, 230, 3rd Floor

Centro, Rio de Janeiro 

20031-170, Brazil

Tel: +55 21 2102 4212

www.daniel-ip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Earlier this month, Managing IP had exclusively reported that the French arm of Taylor Wessing was minded to pull out of the deal
Our latest podcast examines how Weil’s IP practice evolved, where its practitioners could (and will) go next, and which firms and markets stand to benefit from the redistribution of talent
Former Latham partner Chris Henry and transactions lawyer Liza Cotter are heading to the firm as Weil’s IP practice starts to disperse
Rival IP teams return to court for a closely watched appeal over AI and copyright, but observers hoping for answers to some of the technology’s biggest legal questions may be left disappointed
Eight years after its launch, members of the Australian patent firm’s Singapore office explain its growth strategy over the past year
Lawyers at Bowmans Kenya discuss the digital blind spots posed by the transition from physical ledgers to cloud databases and digital co-development models
The Powell Gilbert co-founder discusses the confidence required to launch a firm, building an enduring patent litigation practice and why developing the next generation has changed her measure of success
Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
Gift this article