OPEN PANEL 2026: Diving into Today’s IP
Landscape with INTA
featuring Tat-Tienne Louembe & Olha
Volotkevych
Tat-Tienne Louembe,
INTA’s Chief Representative Officer for the Europe and Intergovernmental
Organizations and Olha Volotkevych, Consultant at INTA give young IP
practicioners an inspirational update on today’s IP landscape.
I first came across International
Trademark Association (“INTA”) during my university years and was immediately
intrigued. Could you elaborate on INTA’s role and relevance for students and
early-stage IP practicioners in Türkiye?
The International Trademark Association (INTA) is a global association of brand owners and intellectual property (IP) professionals committed to elevating the understanding of and respect for IP rights to foster consumer trust, economic growth, and societal transformation. As a not-for-profit association, our role is to serve our members, the profession, and society as a trusted and influential advocate for the economic and social value of brands. Our membership comprises more than 6,600 organizations from 182 jurisdictions. The organizations represent nearly 38,000 professionals, including brand owners from major corporations, small- and medium-sized enterprises, law firms, and nonprofits. Our community also includes government agency members, professors, and law students.
In Türkiye, we have an active network
of 65 member organizations (62 associates and 3 corporates). This is 286
individuals in total.
In 2022, INTA appointed Okan Can (Deris) as its 1st board
member from Türkiye. Thanks to the expertise of our members, we work closely
with the local authorities and are pleased about the level of cooperation. We
have an active MoU with TÜRKPATENT through which we organize regular policy
dialogues, trainings and bilateral meetings. In addition, we conduct workshops
for judges (the most recent one took place in July 2025).
From
May 2-6 INTA will be hosting its Annual Meeting in London at the London Excel
Center. Our Annual Meeting programming focuses on brand related issues,
critical attention is also directed to governance, data protection, trade
secrets, regional regulatory approaches including how to leverage on the
implementation of the EU GPAI Code of Practice as an emerging enforcement tool.
The Association also supports lawyers who
are starting their careers in IP. Through its dedicated Rising
Practitioners Committee, INTA delivers in-person and virtual
roundtables and idea exchanges throughout the year, focused on either
legal/substantive trademark law or on career/personal development and soft
skills. INTA offers an Orientation Session and Reception for First-Time
Attendees at the Annual Meeting, and delivers the Tomorrow’s
Leader Award, which recognises two outstanding rising practitioners for
their early leadership in the IP industry.
What do you often see is misunderstood about IP
Law?
One common misconception is that
trademarks only protect large global brands. In reality, trademarks are
essential tools for businesses of all sizes, including startups, SMEs, and
individual entrepreneurs, helping them build reputation, distinguish their
products and services, and compete effectively in the marketplace.
Another misunderstanding is that
trademarks are only about legal protection. In fact, trademarks are also about consumer
protection, their health, safety, and trust.
They help consumers identify reliable sources of goods and services and prevent
confusion in the marketplace. Trademarks also have an important economic
dimension: they support fair competition, encourage
investment in innovation, and contribute to business growth
and job creation across many industries.
What are the dangers of counterfeit
products and trademark applications that cause a likelihood of confusion risk?
Counterfeit products and trademarks
that create a likelihood of confusion undermine the core purpose of trademarks:
helping consumers identify the genuine source of goods and services.
In terms of direct harms, counterfeit
goods can pose significant consumer health and safety risks, especially in the
case of counterfeit baby formula, cosmetics, medicines, and automobile or
airplane parts. Beyond these risks to consumers, counterfeiting can also
seriously damage the reputation of legitimate brand owners.
From a broader economic perspective,
illicit trade diverts revenue from legitimate businesses, reduces tax income
for governments, and may negatively affect employment and innovation in
brand-driven industries. Studies conducted by the EUIPO and OECD have also
highlighted links between illicit trade and organized crime, corruption*,
and labor exploitation**, underscoring the wider societal impact of
counterfeiting.
Confusingly similar trademarks likewise
mislead consumers and distort fair competition by allowing bad-faith actors to
from the reputation of established brands.
Could you assess the dynamics in the EU
within the scope of the economy?
Counterfeiting remains a significant
economic challenge in the EU. According to the study Mapping
Global Trade in Fakes 2025: Global Trends and Enforcement Challenges,
jointly published by the EUIPO and OECD, global trade in counterfeit goods was
valued at approximately USD 467 billion in 2021, representing around 2.3% of
total global imports. For the EU alone, counterfeit goods were estimated at USD
117 billion, corresponding to roughly 4.7% of total EU imports.
The harmonized EU trademark system
administered by the EUIPO has significantly strengthened brand protection
across member states. However, the rapid expansion of e-commerce and online
marketplaces, combined with the increasing volume of small consignments, has
made coordinated enforcement efforts more important than ever.
In response to these challenges, and
because consumer and brand protection are at the heart of INTA’s advocacy, in
2023 we adopted the Board Resolution “Establishing a Framework for Protecting Consumers from
Third-Party Sales of Counterfeit Goods via Online Marketplaces”.
At the same time, public awareness remains a key element of anti-counterfeiting
efforts.
In 2012, INTA launched the Unreal
Campaign to educate younger audiences about the importance of
trademarks and the risks associated with counterfeit goods. To date, the
program has directly reached more than 100,000 students in-person across over 68
jurisdictions and recieved millons of views and interactions on social media.
What are your assessments and
comments on IP Law protection in the new developing innovation world? Do you
find the traditional IP Law opportunities for protection and Office policies
sufficient?
The rapid pace of technological
development, particularly in areas such as AI has significantly reshaped the
environment in which IP operates. Traditional IP frameworks remain
fundamentally strong and continue to provide effective tools for protecting IP.
However, the innovation world is developing faster than many regulatory
structures. New business models, digital goods and services, virtual
environments, and AI-generated content are raising complex questions regarding
authorship, ownership, and the scope of protection. In this context, while the
traditional opportunities for protection remain relevant, ongoing adaptation of
policies is essential.
Are there any recent studies in the EU
or in INTA about emerging technologies and IP law protection?
While not always framed as “studies”,
INTA regularly publishes policy papers, reports, and Board Resolutions. In
2025, INTA adopted the Board Resolutions “Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property Rights
Foundational Principles” and “Legislation On Deep Fakes (Digital Replicas)”.
The Association has also produced several analytical reports, including “Copyright Developments Concerning NFTs and Metaverses”(2025),
“Copyrightability of AI Prompts: A Comparative Analysis of
the US and the EU” (2025), “Assessing The Utility of ChatGPT As a Trademark Practice
Tool” (2023), and the white paper “Trademarks in the Metaverse”
(2023).
Several recent studies address the
relationship between emerging technologies and IP protection. For example, the
2026 EPO–EUIPO Joint Study: IP and Innovation in European Sectors examines
the relationship between IP protection and innovation in the EU economy. At the
policy level, the European Parliament just recently examined “Copyright and Generative Artificial Intelligence –
Opportunities and Challenges”, addressing questions related to
training data, authorship, and licensing models for AI-generated content.
In addition, the EUIPO published a
study “The Development of Generative Artificial Intelligence from a
Copyright Perspective” (2025),
which analyses how generative AI systems interact with EU copyright law, and “Impact of the Metaverse on Infringement and Enforcement of
Intellectual Property” (2024), which analyzes how virtual
worlds, Web3 technologies, and immersive environments may create new risks and
enforcement challenges for IP rights.
As we know, the Nice Classification has
been modified for 2026. Can you tell us about the motive and your assessments
on the changes for clarity? Should we wait for the official Notification in our
countries or directly begin to apply the new classification as announced by
WIPO?
Correct. The Nice Classification
is reviewed annually to ensure that it reflects developments in technology,
commerce, and new types of goods and services. However, the year 2026
is notable because it introduces the new 13th edition,
rather than just the usual annual update, and some of the changes reflect
discussions with stakeholders from the IP community, including INTA. We have
actively contributed proposals and comments during the review process carried
out by the WIPO Committee of Experts of the Nice Union, where INTA participates
as an observer.
For many years, Class 9, which
covers “Electrical and Scientific Apparatus”, has been one of
the most heavily used classes in the Nice Classification. This is largely due
to the rapid growth of digital and virtual goods, including software, NFTs, and
digital representations of physical products. As a result, Class 9 has become
increasingly broad, creating practical challenges for trademark examination,
clearance, and registration across IP offices.
To address these issues, INTA launched
a research project in 2022, with four potential solutions:
- Subdividing Class 9;
- Transferring certain goods to
existing classes;
- Creating new classes; and
- Not requiring separate
registration for virtual versions of tangible goods.
These proposals were discussed during
sessions of the WIPO Committee of Experts and later informed a survey
conducted by WIPO’s IB among members of the Nice Union. While no single
proposal received unanimous support, transferring certain goods from Class 9 to
existing classes emerged as the most practical option. Based on this work,
seven areas were identified as potentially fitting better in other classes,
including eyewear and vehicles. Following discussions at the last session, the
WIPO Committee of Experts agreed on two key changes:
- Eyewear goods (such as spectacles,
sunglasses, and contact lenses) were moved from Class 9 to Class 10;
- Emergency and rescue vehicles
(such as fire engines and lifeboats) were transferred from Class 9 to
Class 12.
Although limited in scope, these
changes represent an important step toward reducing congestion in Class 9 and
reflect the collaborative efforts of WIPO, member states, and stakeholders such
as INTA to keep the classification system aligned with technological and
commercial realities.
The new edition of the Nice
Classification generally enters into force on January 1 of the relevant year
following its publication by the WIPO. While IP offices may begin applying it
from that date, many national or regional offices formally announce its
adoption through official notifications. Therefore, applicants should check the
practice of the relevant office and follow its official guidance before using
the updated terminology in filings.
More information on INTA’s involvement
in the review of Class 9: https://www.inta.org/news-and-press/inta-news/inta-participates-in-wipos-structural-review-of-class-9/
What are some of the gray areas/gaps
that create risks to the cross-border protection of well-known trademarks?
First, there is no fully
harmonized global standard for determining when a mark qualifies as
“well-known”. While the concept is recognized in international
instruments, namely, Article 6bis of the Paris Convention for the Protection of
Industrial Property and Article 16 of the TRIPS Agreement, with additional
guidance provided in the WIPO Joint Recommendation Concerning Provisions on the
Protection of Well-Known Marks, the criteria for recognition and the required
level of evidence differ significantly among national IP offices and courts. As
a result, a mark considered well known in one jurisdiction may not receive the
same recognition in another.
INTA has historically expressed its
support for the effective protection and enforcement of well-known marks
worldwide. In 2025, INTA adopted the Board Resolution “Updated Framework for Well-Known Marks Protection”,
in which we recommend a flexible evaluation of multiple factors, including
consumer recognition, global sales, advertising, social-media presence etc.
Second, territoriality remains a core
principle of trademark law. Even highly reputed brands may face difficulties
enforcing their rights in jurisdictions where they do not yet have local
commercial activity or prior registration. Although the concept of well-known
marks aims to mitigate this issue, in practice the threshold for proving
reputation across borders can be very high. Therefore, in our Board Resolution,
INTA emphasizes that domestic use or registration should not be required for
recognizing a well-known mark within a jurisdiction.
Third, the treatment of online
reputation and digital presence is an increasingly important gap. Today many
brands build reputation through global online activity (e-commerce, social
media, digital advertising, and online platforms) before entering a market
physically. However, some jurisdictions still focus primarily on traditional
indicators of local reputation, which may undervalue the significance of
cross-border digital visibility.
Recognizing that the digital economy
has transformed how brands gain reputation, INTA has recommended modernizing
the international guidance on well-known marks, including updating the WIPO
Joint Recommendation Concerning Provisions on the Protection of Well‑Known
Marks adopted by WIPO in 1999 (!). The goal is to ensure that the framework
better reflects online use, global brand visibility, and modern commercial
realities. In this context, INTA regularly speaks during the sessions of the
WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and
Geographical Indications, where it participates as an observer.
For instance, INTA plans to raise this
issue again during the session taking place from March 30 to April 2, in
Geneva.
*OECD/EUIPO (2025), Mapping Global Trade
in Fakes 2025: Global Trends and Enforcement Challenges, Illicit Trade, OECD
Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/94d3b29f-en
**OECD/EUIPO (2026), From Fakes to Forced
Labour: Evidence of Correlation Between Illicit Trade in Counterfeits and
Labour Exploitation, Illicit Trade, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/540dc43e-en
Thank
you very much Tat-Tienne Louembe and Olha Volotkevych for this inspiring panel!