Stricter but clearer: the Philippines set for new trademark use guidelines

The Philippines is one of the few countries that require the submission of proof of commercial use of a trademark during its application stage or within three years from the filing date of the application. Failure to comply puts the application or registration at risk of being removed from the registry.

On March 17 2026, the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) issued its Draft Guidelines for the Submission and Examination of Declarations of Actual Use in Trademark Applications and Registrations (the Draft DAU Guidelines), inviting comments from IP practitioners and the public at large.

Requiring the submission of proof of actual use allows the IPOPHL to:

• Prevent trademark squatting;

• Discourage the stockpiling of unused marks, notwithstanding that some were filed for defensive purposes – trademark owners can refile these applications once the period for filing the DAU has expired; and

• Promote business in the Philippines.

The proposed guidelines are stricter and provide clearer instructions by way of templates and examples of what proofs of use are acceptable to keep the application or registration in active condition. When to submit the DAUs has not changed; i.e.:

• Within three years from filing;

• On the fifth anniversary of registration; and

• Upon renewal in the 10th year.

Bona fide commercial use of a mark in the ordinary course of trade in the Philippines was made clearer by the following.

Proof of actual use shall be deemed strongest proof when it satisfies all the following criteria, and shall enjoy the presumption of sufficiency:

• The trademark is shown exactly as registered, free from material variation;

• The proof bears a visible date within the prescribed DAU period and originates from that period; and

• The proof clearly demonstrates territorial use in the Philippines.

Proof of actual use for specific goods under classes 1–34 of the Nice Classification shall consist of evidence showing the mark affixed to, or directly associated with, the goods offered in the Philippine market. Acceptable proof includes:

• Photographs of goods/actual products;

• Product packaging or labels (as used) bearing the mark;

• Sales invoices or receipts referencing the covered goods;

• Brochures, posters, flyers, catalogues, or advertisements circulated in the Philippines showing the mark in connection with the offering for sale of the covered goods;

• Photographs of retail displays showing the goods with the mark; and

• Philippine-targeted online listings with verifiable links and visible timestamps.

Unacceptable proof includes:

• Digitally created/altered images where the mark is superimposed;

• Prototypes, samples, or concepts not yet offered in the market;

• Unused or template labels and packaging not affixed to actual goods;

• Government-issued documents/permits/certifications; e.g., a Food and Drug Administration Certificate of Product Registration, Securities and Exchange Commission registration, Department of Trade and Industry business name registration mock‑ups or portfolio displays created solely for presentation purposes; and

• Foreign or non‑Philippine websites with no indication of availability in the Philippine market.

Proof of actual use for services under classes 35–45 of the Nice Classification shall consist of proof showing the mark in the actual rendering or offering of services in the Philippines.

Acceptable proof includes:

• Executed contracts bearing the mark and describing the services rendered;

• Invoices bearing the mark and describing the services rendered;

• Brochures, posters, flyers, or advertisements linking the mark to the services;

• Website or social media screenshots with verifiable links and visible timestamps; and

• Photographs of establishments or facades with signages displaying the mark.

Unacceptable proof includes:

• Unsigned or draft service contracts;

• Pro forma invoices, blank invoices, or receipts lacking client details or a service description;

• Generic brochures or advertisements showing only the logo without reference to services;

• Foreign websites or pages not directed to the Philippine market;

• Inactive, ‘under construction’, or unverified sites with no commercial activity; and

• Business permits or registrations that do not demonstrate actual rendering of services under the mark.

Online proof of actual use must clearly establish that the mark is being used in the ordinary course of trade directed towards the Philippine market. Acceptable online proof includes verified website screenshots, social media posts, and other digital materials showing the mark in genuine commercial use.

For multi-class applications, each class should be supported by at least one distinct item of proof and where the same item is intended to support multiple classes, a proof mapping table is strongly encouraged. An example of a proof mapping table for an online proof showing how a single piece of proof may be validly mapped is shown below.

One website screenshot may simultaneously support goods and service classes.

The above are some of the salient points of the Draft DAU Guidelines expected to be formally issued soon. It functions as a comprehensive and coherent document that effectively guides all concerned through the DAU submission and examination process, as reference can be easily made to one material.

The required proof of use for goods and services, as well as that for online sources, may prove to be more stringent and burdensome for foreign and domestic clients, as well as for trademark agents, but it fulfils the IPOPHL’s goal of ensuring that there is actual commercial use of the mark in the Philippines.