Bad-faith filings: what they are and why they matter

By Işıl Çavuş · 9 September 2026 · Bad faith

A trademark application normally has a plain purpose. A business picks a name, uses it or means to use it, and asks for protection. Not every application is filed for that reason. Sometimes the applicant knows that someone else already uses the same name, or has no intention of using it at all, and files to block that other business, to gain leverage in a dispute or to profit from someone else's reputation.

That is where bad faith comes in. A bad-faith filing is, in short, an application made in circumstances that do not fit the legitimate purpose of the trademark system. There is no single definition that applies everywhere. Offices and courts apply their own law. And bad faith is rarely visible from the mark itself: two applications for the same word can be, one honest and the other not. The difference lies in the surrounding facts.

Filing first is not always enough

Many people believe that "I filed first, so it is mine." In a number of countries the first valid application does carry a lot of weight. But the first applicant is not automatically protected if the application was made in bad faith. Trademark law is not simply a race to submit forms.

Take a business that has sold under a brand for years but has not registered it in a certain country. A competitor notices and files the same name there. "We filed first" does not answer why the application was made or what the filer knew.

Situations that often raise the question

Taking someone else's brand. A company uses NORTHSTAR for software and has not registered it in a country. A third party files NORTHSTAR for the same software there and then asks for payment to hand it over. The names match, but what raises the question is the history around the filing.

Filing to sell it back. Filing in order to sell the registration to the real user is a classic pattern. It does not prove bad faith in every country, but the filer's conduct, timing and knowledge become evidence.

Blocking a competitor. Company A is about to enter a market. Company B hears about it and files A's brands for the same goods. If the filings were made mainly to obstruct, the question arises.

Abusing a former relationship. A distributor, agent, licensee, former employee, franchisee or manufacturer learns about a brand through the relationship and later files it in their own name. The prior relationship can show how the filer knew.

Riding on a famous brand. A well-known name attracts applications for unrelated goods by people who expect to benefit from its reputation. How well-known marks are treated varies by country.

No genuine plan to use the mark. Filing before launch is not suspect: businesses often secure a brand before entering a market. The question is the real purpose at the time of filing, which may become clear from the applicant's activities.

What is examined

An ordinary conflict between marks asks whether they are confusingly similar. A bad-faith case asks why the application was filed, in these circumstances, by this applicant. That calls for evidence from outside the register:

• emails and letters between the parties, and contracts such as distribution, licensing or agency agreements
• invoices and sales records that show earlier dealings
• archived websites, marketing material, social media posts and product launches
• domain registration history and corporate records

Intent is rarely written down in plain words. It is inferred from facts: prior use of the mark by someone else, the filer's knowledge of that use, a close business relationship, the timing, the absence of any convincing reason to choose the mark, and conduct that suggests blocking or profiting. Knowledge alone does not prove bad faith, and no single fact usually decides it. Together they can.

Timing in particular can tell a story. Suppose negotiations between two companies collapse in April, and one files the other's brand in May. That does not prove bad faith, but it raises questions: what did the filer know, was there an agreement about the brand, did it have a plan to use the mark?

Where bad faith comes up

It can be raised in an opposition, where it is one of the possible grounds in some countries, and after registration, where it can support a request to cancel or invalidate the mark. An accusation is not enough. The party who makes it generally has to show the facts and meet the legal requirements of the country. A registration is therefore not necessarily beyond challenge, and owners should build their portfolios on real rights and a genuine plan.

Defensive filing is a different thing. Registering a brand in several countries before expanding is normal portfolio management. Filing early, or broadly, is not bad faith in itself. The problem arises when filing is used for an improper purpose. It also helps to keep separate ideas apart. Bad faith is not the same as infringement, which concerns unauthorised use of a mark, and a mere "they copied my idea" is not a trademark ground at all.

If someone has filed your brand

Start with facts, not accusations.

• Check the record. Application number, filing date, applicant, classes, goods, status and country.
• Collect your own history. When you started using the brand, where, for what, how it was marketed, and when the other party could have known.
• Rebuild the relationship, if there was one: contracts, emails, invoices, meeting notes.
• Check the deadline. If the application is still pending, an opposition period may be open, and it can be short.
• Look at the applicant's conduct. Signs of knowledge, repeated filings, related domains, offers to sell.
• Get the position assessed by someone who knows the law of that country. Which facts count, and which procedure is open, differs. We can arrange this through one of our partners there.

If someone accuses you of bad faith, the same applies in reverse. Look at the history of your application: when you chose the brand, when you began to use it, what plans existed before you filed, whether you knew the other party, why you chose these goods. Keep your records.

Lowering the risk before you expand

• Search properly for similar spellings, sounds, meanings and related goods in each country. See trademark search.
• Document the brand's development: when the name was created and by whom, when the domain was bought, when products and marketing began. This does not create rights by itself but shows a commercial history.
• File before you enter a new market, not after the launch. See why a trademark is territorial.
• Be careful with partners. If a distributor, agent or manufacturer has access to your brand, put in writing who owns it.
• Watch the registers after you file. An opposition deadline is far easier to handle if you hear about the application early. See trademark monitoring.

Frequently asked questions

What we do

The best protection is to avoid the situation: search before you build the brand, file in the countries that matter before you enter them, and watch for similar filings so you hear about them while there is still time to act.

If you think someone has taken your brand, write to us at once. We tell you what the register shows and what deadlines apply. If the matter needs to be fought, an opposition, a cancellation action or a case in court, we arrange it through one of our partners in the country concerned and stay your point of contact. See trademark disputes. The glossary explains the terms.

This article is general information and is not legal advice. Rules differ between countries and change over time; check the official source for your case.