IP Legal

The EU SME Fund providing grants for registration of trademarks and designs is back in 2026

Hristo Raychev — Mon, 02 Feb 2026 16:47:06 +0000

As from today 02 February 2026 EU-based and Ukraine-based small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), as well as self-employed professionals, may apply for grants for protection of their IP rights. The SME Fund finances up to 75% of the official fees for protection of the SME’s marks and designs at national, EU and international level. Vouchers may be received also for other activities such as IP Scan and IP Scan Enforcement, as well as for financing the fees and costs for patents and new plant varieties.

The application process is very simplified. The non-repayable financial aid may be used for reimbursement of the following fees:

– 75% of the official fees for application and registration of national marks and designs or EU marks and designs.

– 50% of the official fees for application and registration of international marks and designs in non-EU countries.

The maximum amount of the voucher for trademark and design fees is EUR 700 per applicant.

After applying and receiving the approval for funding, the relevant activity should be undertaken, i.e. one or more applications for mark or design shall be prepared and filed within 1 month. The fees for the applications shall be paid by the SME, and the fund subsequently reimburses the relevant percentage of the amounts thus paid. The fund will examine financing applications every Friday and the term for notifying an approval is short – up to 10 working days as from review of the application.

If you would like to protect your marks and designs at significantly reduced costs, do not hesitate to contact us.

Link to the official SME Fund website: https://www.euipo.europa.eu/en/sme-corner/sme-fund/2026

The 2025 edition of the EU Fund providing grants for registration of trademarks and designs is now open

Hristo Raychev — Mon, 03 Feb 2025 09:53:43 +0000

As from today EU-based and Ukraine-based small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) may apply for grants for protection of their IP rights. The SME Fund finances up to 75% of the official fees for protection of the SME’s marks and designs at national, EU and international level. Vouchers may be received also for other activities such as IP Scan and IP Scan Enforcement, as well as for financing the fees and costs for patents and new plant varieties.

The application process is very simplified. The non-repayable financial aid may be used for reimbursement of the following fees:
– 75% of the official fees for application and registration of national marks and designs or EU marks and designs.
– 50% of the official fees for application and registration of marks and designs in non-EU countries.
The maximum amount of the voucher for trademark and design fees is EUR 700 per SME.
After applying and receiving the approval for funding, the relevant activity should be undertaken, i.e. one or more applications for mark or design shall be prepared and filed within 1 month. The fees for the applications shall be paid by the SME, and the fund subsequently reimburses the relevant percentage of the amounts thus paid.

If you would like to protect your marks and designs at significantly reduced costs, do not hesitate to contact us.

Five common IP myths debunked

Hristo Raychev — Mon, 27 Jan 2025 15:52:27 +0000

Myth Number One: If a work is published on the internet, it is free to use

A common mistake made equally by individuals, SMEs and even larger corporations is to conclude that any work (video, photo, presentation, etc.) published on the internet becomes free to use by anyone. This assumption is wrong and dangerous. The author of a work has the exclusive right to decide whether, how and when to publish the work – the publication however does not mean an authorization for anyone to use the work. Despite publication, the author retains full copyright meaning that the work or parts of it may be legally used only with the author’s permission (with a carveout for exceptions and limitations to copyright which are subject to strict statutory conditions and are applied restrictively).

Myth Number Two: I do not need to register a mark, my company or business name is unique

Company or business names and registered marks are very different concepts. Normally commercial registers verify and make sure that a company name is unique on the relevant national or regional territory. These names are used to identify the legal entity (company) itself and not the goods and services it markets. Trademarks, on the contrary, are used to indicate the commercial origin of goods and services and a company may own several marks for its different product lines. Consumers are usually confronted with marks, they link the qualities of the goods and services to the marks (and therefore marks are the device which accumulates reputation for the respective product). Therefore, it is crucial to protect the company’s marks by registration in the territories where it markets its goods and services.

Myth Number Three: I have a business model and I want to register it so that nobody can use it

Often businesses develop an idea or a business model, e.g. a new service offered via online platform, and aim to gain exclusivity over such idea or business model. This is an extremely hard task which can hardly be achieved through registration of IP. Ideas on their own are not patentable. Also, under the European Patent Convention, schemes, rules and methods for doing business are not regarded as inventions and are not patentable. In these scenarios it is important to refer to other possibles ways of protection such as trade secrets, combined with other IP rights that could enhance the position and reputation of the business over time (trademarks, designs, etc.).

Myth Number Four: I can protect my patent, trademark or design worldwide

There is no such thing as a worldwide trademark, design or patent. These are all registered IP rights meaning that they are protected in the territory of the country (or regional organisation such as the EU) where the IP rights holder has applied to protect its rights and has received registration. This is why it is critical for businesses to identify the markets where they have present or potential commercial interests so that a sound IP protection strategy can be put in place accordingly.

Myth Number Five: You have to register your copyright to protect it

Although this common misunderstanding tends to disappear, we still receive request for registering works which are subject to copyright in order to protect them. It is important to know that copyright arises automatically from the moment of creation of the work and its fixation into a certain tangible form. The questions of proving copyright, the moment of creation and authorship are another issue. Despite that copyright protection is automatic, steps may be taken to collect enough evidence in advance on the work(s) created, the time of creation and the authorship. Such steps shall be consulted with an IP professional depending on the concrete work at hand and the specific circumstances.

IP Alert: new legislation on EU design protection

Hristo Raychev — Tue, 26 Nov 2024 10:24:11 +0000

On 18 November 2024 a design reform package was published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The package includes a recast Directive on legal protection of designs and amending Regulation on EU designs.

The changes will come into effect in stages – the first stage regarding EU designs will enter into force on 8 April 2025. EU Member States have an additional term to transpose the changes into their national laws.

Below is a summary of the adopted main reforms in the design protection:

The definition of ‘design’ is updated to cover also animated images and designs, transitions, movements, etc. At the same time the requirements on visibility of a design and scope of protection are clarified and developed
The definition of ‘product’ to which a design is applied now also includes non-physical forms (such as graphical user interfaces, interior and exterior layouts, websites, etc.)
The so-called “repair clause” is explicitly regulated providing, under certain conditions, a limitation of design protection in case of repairs and spare parts
Design fees are now simplified by merging the registration and publication fee; application fees are made simpler and are optimized in case of multiple designs applied for by a single design application
Similar to trademarks, design owners will be able to inform the public that their rights are registered by displaying the registration symbol of a letter D enclosed within a circle
Design owners are given a new exclusive right to 3-D print their designs (and are protected against 3-D printing without their permission)
More defense possibilities are envisaged in case of infringement claims – design users may now be exempt from responsibility if they are using another person’s design in comparative advertising, or for the purposes of comment, critique or parody (showing a certain similarity to copyright exceptions and limitations).

EU Fund provides grants for registration of trademarks and designs in 2024

Hristo Raychev — Mon, 05 Feb 2024 16:23:20 +0000

The EUIPO and the European Commission launched the 2024 edition of the SME Fund, which offers intellectual property vouchers for EU-based small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

SMEs may apply until 6 December 2024 to receive grants financing up to 75% of the official fees for protection of their marks and designs at national, EU and international level.

The application process is as easy as possible. The non-repayable financial aid may be used for reimbursement of the following fees:

– 75% of the official fees for application and registration of national marks and designs or EU marks and designs.

– 50% of the official fees for application and registration of marks and designs in non-EU countries.

After applying and receiving the approval for funding, the relevant activity should be undertaken, i.e. one or more applications for mark or design shall be prepared and filed. The fees for the applications shall be paid by the SME, and the fund subsequently reimburses the relevant percentage of the amounts thus paid.

If you would like to protect your marks and designs at significantly reduced costs, do not hesitate to contact us: office@iplegal.bg or hristo@iplegal.bg

EUIPO publishes a report on trade secret litigation in the EU (with contribution from IP Legal)

Hristo Raychev — Tue, 31 Oct 2023 13:15:08 +0000

The EUIPO Observatory published a new report on the litigation trends in the EU concerning the unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure of trade secrets pursuant the EU Trade Secrets Directive – Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016.

The report covers litigation (approx. 700 judgments) between 1 January 2017 and 31 October 2022 in all EU Member States. The partner in IP Legal – Hristo Raychev acted as national correspondent and contributor to the study by providing and analysing the relevant case-law in Bulgaria.

The study shows differences in the practice across EU Member States, especially in terms of volumes of cases, success rate, subject matter and bodies before which claims have been raised. As far as Bulgaria is concerned, the study shows the importance of taking appropriate and reasonable steps to protect the trade secret and the difficulties in litigating trade secrets in the current court and administrative practice. Successful trade secret protection requires raising management awareness on the relevance of the topic for each business, adopting a trade secret policy and implementing sufficient legal and technical protocols for preserving the commercially valuable data.

The SME Fund now available also for funding IP rights protection of Ukrainian-based companies

Hristo Raychev — Fri, 07 Jul 2023 10:18:10 +0000

Since July 5, 2023 the SME Fund will provide grant funding for trademark, design, patent and plant variety protection at national and EU level also to Ukrainian-based companies. Financial support provided by the European Commission and the EUIPO to Ukraine-based SMEs will include:

trade mark and design protection within the European Union (national, regional, EU level) for 75% of the official/state fees up to a maximum of EUR 1,000

patent protection or related activities within the European Union (national patents and European patents) for 75% of the official/state fees up to a maximum of EUR 1,500

plant variety protection at European level for 50% of the official/state fees to a maximum of EUR 225

More information about the grant scheme and online application forms can be found here:

https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/bg/online-services/sme-fund

If you are a Ukrainian business and would like to protect your marks and designs at significantly reduced costs, do not hesitate to contact us.

Conference on Geographical Indications: where is the EU heading to?

Hristo Raychev — Wed, 26 Apr 2023 16:25:50 +0000

Today, IP Legal attended a conference organized by the Patent Office of the Republic of Bulgaria and the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) on the occasion of the World Intellectual Property Day. The event was dedicated to Geographical Indications (GIs) and featured distinguished speakers from the Bulgarian Patent Office, as well as members of the EUIPO Board of Appeal and Mediation Center.

Amongst many issued discussed, the main topic was the ongoing reform of the GIs system in the EU. In April last year, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a Regulation on GIs for craft and industrial products to extend EU-wide protection to products such as Murano glass, Porcelaine de Limoges, Solingen cutlery, etc. The Regulation is currently being discussed between the EU Commission, Parliament and Council which are expected to reach a consensus in the months to follow. Another important topic was the new Regulation on GIs for wine, spirit drinks and agricultural products, and quality schemes for agricultural products, which is envisaged to repeal the current Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012. The EU level of registration of such GIs is now established as an exclusive regime for all EU Member States. The new regulation for wine, spirit drinks and agricultural products will most likely attribute more powers to the EUIPO in the process of registration and maintenance of GIs at the EU level.

Reminder: EU Fund provides grants for registration of marks and designs of SMEs. Apply now!

Hristo Raychev — Thu, 12 May 2022 08:01:13 +0000

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are eligible to obtain grants to register their marks and designs by submitting an online application by 16 December 2022.

The application process is as easy as possible. All that is required is for the applicant to be an SME, and to fill in an online form by attaching only two documents in PDF format: a bank statement indicating the bank account of the SME and a VAT registration certificate.

The financial aid may be used for reimbursement of the following fees:

– 75% of the official fees for application and registration of national marks and designs or EU marks and designs.

– 50% of the official fees for application and registration of marks and designs in non-EU countries.

The aid is granted in the same amount for all applicants – up to EUR 1,500. This amount can be used for one or more marks or designs up to the cumulative maximum of EUR 1,500.

Approval is received within 20 working days after application. Only after receiving the approval for funding, the relevant activity should be undertaken, i.e. one or more applications for mark or design shall be prepared and filed. The fees for the applications shall be paid by the SME, and the fund subsequently reimburses the relevant percentage of the amounts thus paid.

Once the fees for the mark or design have been paid, in order to reimburse the relevant percentage, the SME must explicitly request this. The application for reimbursement is submitted online through the same account created by the SME when applying for the aid.

More information about the grant scheme and online application forms can be found here:

https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/bg/online-services/sme-fund

If you would like to protect your marks and designs at significantly reduced costs, do not hesitate to contact us.

Return to innocence: EU Court of Justice rules on copyright liability of YouTube and other platforms

Hristo Raychev — Sat, 26 Jun 2021 13:58:00 +0000

By its recent judgment of 22 June 2021, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) tackled issues with important implications on sharing online platforms such as YouTube (joined cases C-682/18 and C-683/18). The issues were referred to the CJEU by the German Federal Court of Justice and relate to whether online sharing platforms such as YouTube perform copyright-restricted acts, incl. possible copyright infringements, when protected content is illegally made available by their users.

In a nutshell, the first of the joined cases referred to the CJEU concerns a court dispute for illegally making available of recordings and performances of Sarah Brightman on YouTube. The second case was brought forward by the international publisher Elsevier regarding specialized medical literature which was made available on the “Uploaded” file-hosting and sharing platform.

The CJEU clearly confirmed that when the users of platforms, such as YouTube, illegally upload protected content they generally perform “acts of communication to the public” (Art. 3 of the InfoSoc Directive) of this content and are potentially liable for copyright breach. When assessing the platform operators’ contribution in such cases, however, the Court provided more of a guidance as to when platform operators may be liable. The criteria discussed by the Court were as follows.

The CJEU noted that when the respective platform is indispensable, i.e. when it facilitates the sharing of content which otherwise would be impossible or far more complex, this points towards a copyright-restricted act of communication to the public. However, this is not the sole criterion to be considered. Even if the respective platform is necessary to facilitate the sharing of content, the Court took the view that that it is crucial whether the platform operator acts deliberately, i.e. whether it acts with full knowledge of the consequences of his actions as an intermediary in the illegal content sharing.

Based on the above fundamental premise, the Court concluded that the operator of an online sharing platform such as YouTube performs the copyright-restricted act of “communication to the public”, and is potentially liable, when it contributes, beyond merely making that platform available, to giving access to such content to the public in breach of copyright. Again, in a non-exhaustive fashion the Court gave the following examples of when an online sharing platform such as YouTube may be committing a breach of copyright in the form of illegal communication to the public:

When the operator has specific knowledge that protected content is available illegally on its platform and refrains from expeditiously deleting or blocking access to it. This would be the case when YouTube is sent a copyright takedown request from a legitimate rightsholder and does not delete/block the flagged content (or delays such deletion or blocking for unreasonable period);

When the operator, although it generally knows or must know that users are making protected content available illegally via its platform, has not put in place appropriate and reasonably diligent technological measures to effectively address any copyright infringements on that platform. This would be the case for example when a platform does not provide even basic mechanisms for copyright owners to track down infringing content (such mechanism is, for instance, YouTube’s content-recognition software which enables to identify other videos on YouTube having the same content in whole or in part); and/or

When the operator himself participates in selecting copyright-protected content which is illegally made available on its platform, as well as when the operator provides tools on its platform specifically intended for the illegal sharing of such content or knowingly promotes such sharing. For instance, this would be the case when the platform operator has adopted a financial model that incentivizes users of its platform to illegally post copyright-protected content.

Conclusion

As seen in other cases, the CJEU does not provide clear-cut answers to the issues raised by it, but rather leaves for national courts to decide on a case-by-case basis. Nevertheless, based on the Court’s ruling, it may be concluded that online platform operators, such as YouTube, are “innocent” for illegal communication to the public of a copyrighted work, provided that: (a) they are unaware at all of the concrete infringement(s) committed or delete/block the infringing content immediately upon becoming aware; (b) they have taken appropriate technological measures to fight copyright breaches; and (c) they do not themselves select, promote or encourage in any way the illegal sharing of copyright-protected works.