Trademarks for Going Global: Madrid International Registration vs. Country-by-Country Applications — How Should Companies Choose?

Chinese companies preparing to enter overseas markets often hear two pieces of advice: one says that a single application through the Madrid system can cover multiple countries, saving effort and money; the other says that direct country-by-country applications are more reliable. Neither statement is wrong, but neither can be applied directly as-is.

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) will set up a booth (number 35) at the Annual Meeting of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA), held in Washington, D.C. from 29 to 31, 10, 2026, where experts on the PCT, Madrid and Hague systems will be on hand to provide consultations; on the afternoon of 30, 10, a special workshop titled "Using the Madrid System for International Trademark Protection" will also be held, and registration is required. Occasions like this cannot resolve a particular company's specific choice, but they point to a basic fact: the Madrid system is one procedural route, not the default answer for every overseas filing strategy.

First, distinguish the routes. Direct country-by-country filing means submitting separately under the law of each target country; Madrid international registration uses a home application or registration as a springboard to designate multiple member parties through a single application; and there are also regional systems, such as the European Union trademark, where one application covers multiple member states. The three can be used in combination; it is not an either-or choice.

The real question to answer first is not "whether to use Madrid," but three conditions.

First, scope of coverage. Check one by one whether the target markets are Madrid member parties — countries outside the system can only be applied for country by country; at the same time, look at local practical requirements for the classification and description of goods and services, because a Madrid application must ultimately be examined under the standards of each member party.

Second, the basis of rights. Madrid international registration presupposes a basic application or registration, and for five years from the date of international registration it remains dependent on the basic trademark: if the basic trademark is revoked, declared invalid or abandoned during these five years, the international registration becomes invalid along with it — what the industry calls "central attack." Only after five years does the international registration become independent of the basic trademark. If the basic right itself is unstable, a centralized application will magnify the risk as well.

Third, subsequent management. The Madrid system is relatively centralized for later designations, changes, and renewals, with lower procedural costs; but when local examination opinions, oppositions, or cancellations arise, they must still be handled one by one under each jurisdiction's procedures. A centralized application does not equal centralized problem-solving.

Timing is also often overlooked. Overseas trademark layout should align with the pace of product launch, channel rollout, and promotional placement. Where the first-launch market is already determined, search and filing can first be completed around that market, then other member parties added through the Madrid system according to the expansion plan; when the market plan is not yet clear, blindly expanding the designated scope to "reserve a spot" first will bring follow-on maintenance costs.

In preparation, four categories of materials can first be organized: a list of target markets; how the brand mark is actually used; core goods and services; and the registration status and validity period of existing trademarks. Where local examination notices have already been received or similar-mark obstacles encountered, first confirm the procedural stage and response deadline, then discuss whether to adjust the route.

It should be noted that route selection does not promise any registration outcome. The Madrid system lowers procedural costs, not the substantive examination standards of each member party; filing country by country is not necessarily more "secure" either, only more direct in control. For a specific brand and a specific market, item-by-item verification against the market plan and rights basis is still required.

Source: WIPO "Connect and Learn with WIPO at AIPLA 2026" (published 2026 year 10 month 26 day); procedural rules related to the Madrid system.
Note: The content of this article is compiled from public information and is only general intellectual property popularization and practical observation, for information reference only; it does not constitute legal advice or other professional advice for any specific case, and the relevant determinations and conclusions should be subject to the official published documents and the actual circumstances of the individual case.