April 16, 2026 ©️ Copyright – Goldkeen International Property Office
Introduction
Many entrepreneurs in Taiwan begin their branding journey by using the Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) trademark search system to check for identical names.
This is a good first step. However, a common misunderstanding arises when applicants see “no identical results” and assume their trademark will be approved.
In reality, many applicants proceed to file immediately—only to receive a Notice of Refusal months later. This not only wastes time and costs, but also delays critical brand development opportunities.
At Goldkeen, we observe that most trademark refusals are not caused by identical names, but by something more complex: likelihood of confusion under trademark law.
Why Different Names Can Still Be Rejected
A frequent question from applicants is:
“Why was my trademark rejected when no identical mark appeared in the search?”
The answer lies in how trademarks are examined.
Under Article 30, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 10 of the Taiwan Trademark Act, a trademark will not be registered if it is identical or similar to a prior mark and is likely to cause confusion among consumers.
Trademark examination is not a simple comparison of identical names. Instead, similarity is assessed based on overall impression. In practice, examiners evaluate similarity from three key perspectives: concept, pronunciation, and appearance.
Conceptual Similarity: The Most Overlooked Risk
Conceptual similarity is one of the most common reasons for refusal, yet also the most difficult for applicants to detect.
Two trademarks may look completely different in wording or language, but if they convey the same core idea or value, consumers may associate them with the same source.
For example, a registered mark meaning “warmth delivered home” and another combining English and Chinese elements with the same meaning may still be considered similar if used in related services.
This type of hidden risk is rarely identifiable through basic search tools. It requires professional analysis based on market perception and brand messaging.
Phonetic Similarity: When Sound Creates Confusion
Phonetic similarity arises when trademarks differ in writing but sound the same or highly similar.
Even small differences in spelling may not prevent confusion, especially in spoken recommendations or word-of-mouth scenarios.
In industries such as beauty, food, or retail, where brand names are frequently shared verbally, phonetic similarity can significantly increase the risk of refusal.
Visual Similarity: Beyond Words
Visual similarity is not limited to identical characters. It includes typography, layout, graphic elements, and color schemes.
Even if two trademarks use different words, they may still create a similar overall visual impression.
For example, two clothing brands using similar circular logos, minimalist layouts, and soft color palettes may still be considered confusingly similar.
In trademark examination, overall impression matters more than isolated differences.
Cross-Class Filings Are Not Risk-Free
Many applicants assume that filing in a different class eliminates risk. However, trademark examination also considers the relatedness of goods and services.
If products or services share market channels, target consumers, or potential brand extension paths, they may still be considered similar.
For example, Class 35 (retail and e-commerce services) is often closely related to product classes such as furniture or apparel. In modern business models, where brands integrate products and online platforms, consumers may perceive them as coming from the same source.
Therefore, professional trademark searches go beyond class comparison. They analyze market relationships and examination trends to identify potential conflicts.
Goldkeen’s Risk Assessment Approach
Basic trademark searches answer only one question:
“Does an identical mark exist?”
At Goldkeen, our approach focuses on a more important question:
“Can this trademark be successfully registered—and how should it be filed?”
Based on extensive practical experience, we have developed a structured risk assessment process.
When high similarity risk is identified, we may recommend adjusting the trademark design, such as modifying text combinations or adding distinctive graphic elements.
If risks cannot be fully avoided, we may suggest narrowing the scope of goods or services to reduce overlap with prior marks.
In cases where the brand name is essential, we also assist clients in preparing evidence to support acquired distinctiveness, strengthening the chances of registration.
Conclusion
A trademark is more than a name—it is the core identity of a brand.
A refusal not only means losing application fees, but also missing valuable market timing and exposing the business to future infringement risks.
Basic searches alone cannot fully identify hidden risks such as likelihood of confusion. Professional trademark agents, with deep understanding of Article 30 of the Taiwan Trademark Act, market language, and examination practice, play a critical role in securing brand protection.
Choosing the right strategy from the beginning can make the difference between approval and rejection—and ultimately determine the success of your brand.
Need Help with Trademark Clearance?
Goldkeen provides:
- Advanced trademark similarity analysis
- Likelihood of confusion assessment
- Filing strategy and risk mitigation
Contact us today to secure your trademark before filing.
