Sound Marks, Motion Marks, and Beyond: How to Register Non-Traditional Trademarks in China Under the 2027 Law

Article 14 of China's revised Trademark Law adds dynamic marks to the list of signs that can be registered. Read on its own, that sentence sounds like an invitation. Read against ten years of sound mark practice, it reads more like a warning.

Non-traditional marks are the most oversold category in Chinese trademark practice. Brands see a longer list of registrable signs and conclude that the jingle, the animated logo and the color scheme are now ownable. Some of them are. Most are not, and the reason is not bureaucratic stubbornness. It is that a mark has to identify a commercial source, and most non-traditional brand assets do not.

This guide covers what the 2027 law actually permits, what the office requires for each mark type, and what the evidence says about which filings succeed. The motion mark framework introduced by the same revision is covered in depth in the guide to dynamic trademarks in China under the 2026 law.

Quick answer: Article 14 of the 2026 revision adds dynamic marks to the registrable signs alongside words, graphics, letters, numbers, three-dimensional marks, color combinations and sounds. Article 18 then excludes anything that consists solely of what results from the nature of the goods, is needed for a technical result, or gives the goods substantial value. Sound marks have been registrable since May 2014 but succeed rarely: practitioner tallies put 2014 to 2023 at about 885 applications and about 39 registrations.

What Article 14 Adds, and What It Does Not

Article 14 lists what can be registered as a trademark: words, graphics, letters, numbers, three-dimensional signs, color combinations, sounds, dynamic marks, and combinations of those elements. The 2026 revision's addition is the dynamic mark. This is one of the headline changes in the eight key changes of the 2027 Trademark Law.

That is a real expansion. An animated logo, a motion sequence used as a source identifier, and a moving app icon are now capable of registration in their own right, rather than having to be squeezed into a static figurative filing.

What Article 14 does not do is lower the distinctiveness bar. A sign appearing on the list means it may be registered. It does not mean it will be. The article sits in the chapter on registration conditions for a reason, and the rest of that chapter decides who actually gets through.

The Wall Behind the List: Article 18

Article 18 sets out the functionality exclusion, and the revision extends it expressly to the newer categories. A three-dimensional sign, a color combination, a sound or a dynamic mark may not be registered where it consists solely of:

• the shape, color combination, sound, motion effect or other characteristic that results from the nature of the goods themselves;
• a shape or characteristic necessary to obtain a technical result; or
• a characteristic that gives the goods substantial value.

For non-traditional marks, this is where many filings die. A sound that is simply the noise the product makes is functional. A color that is what the material naturally looks like is functional. A shape a competitor needs in order to build a working product is functional. The analysis is not about whether the mark is distinctive. It is about whether competitors can be excluded from the element at all.

Article 73 mirrors the rule on the enforcement side: even where such an element is part of a registered mark, the owner cannot stop a competitor's fair use of it. A non-traditional registration that collides with Article 18 is therefore both hard to obtain and weak once obtained.

The Distinctiveness Test, and the One Door That Opens

Article 17 is the ordinary distinctiveness provision. A sign lacking distinctive character cannot be registered -- unless it has acquired distinctive character through use and is easy to identify. The same paragraph refuses generic names, direct descriptions of quality or raw materials, and other signs that consumers read as information rather than as a brand.

For non-traditional marks, that second clause is not a fallback. It is the main road. Almost every sound mark and color mark that has succeeded in China got there by proving acquired distinctiveness -- years of use, in the Chinese market, in a way that taught consumers to associate the sign with one source.

That is a documentation exercise as much as a legal one, and it is the same evidence file that Article 78's use-evidence rule demands when an infringement defendant challenges whether a mark was ever used. Brands that keep dated use records get two defenses out of the same file.

The Sound Mark Reality Check

Sound marks became registrable in China on May 1, 2014, when the then-new law dropped the old visibility requirement. CNIPA has never published a clean cumulative total; practitioner tallies of office filings put the decade from 2014 to 2023 at roughly 885 applications, of which only about 39 registered -- a success rate near four percent. The number is an industry estimate, not an official statistic, but every independently compiled tally tells the same story.

The marks that made it share a profile: short, highly distinctive, and attached to a product or service with real Chinese market presence.

The first sound mark to complete registration was China Radio International's broadcast program opening, filed on the first working day after the law changed and registered in 2016 in Classes 38 and 41. It is a short musical phrase used to identify a broadcaster -- close to a textbook example of a sound functioning as a source identifier -- and even that application needed three rounds of correction and extensive use material before approval.

The first sound mark to go through judicial review was Tencent's QQ notification tone, application number 14502527, filed in 2014 in Class 38. The office and the review board refused it as a simple, ordinary tone lacking distinctiveness. Tencent litigated. The Beijing Intellectual Property Court overturned the refusal in 2018, and the Beijing High People's Court upheld that result later the same year -- expressly finding that a single repeated "di" tone is not inherently distinctive, but that more than a decade of continuous, massive use on QQ had taught the Chinese public to associate the tone with Tencent, giving it acquired distinctiveness. The registration went through on that basis.

Two lessons sit in those two examples. First, the successful cases are short and unmistakable -- a broadcaster's signature phrase, a messaging app's alert tone. Second, the QQ case took over four years and two court levels, with market-share reports and hundreds of press references in evidence. That is the real cost of proving acquired distinctiveness when the office's first instinct is refusal.

By contrast, longer advertising music and product jingles have repeatedly failed for lack of distinctiveness, because consumers hear them as background music rather than as a brand identifier.

What You Actually Have to File

Sound marks. The format was set out in the 2014 implementing rules: the sound is described using a stave or numbered musical notation, with a written description, and an audio sample is submitted. The description and the sample must match. Where notation cannot capture the sound, a written description carries it. A pre-filing CNIPA database search cannot meaningfully compare two sounds the way it compares two words, so the clearance discussion has to focus on known jingles and broadcast signatures rather than on an exact-match hit list.

Dynamic marks. This category is new to the statute. CNIPA published a draft of the revised Trademark Examination Guidelines on September 28, 2026, focused on the key changes in the new law, with comments closing November 12, 2026. The draft is where the detailed filing formats for dynamic marks -- storyboard frames, duration, the static key frame -- are being settled. Until the guidelines are final, treat the format requirements as in motion and confirm them with the office before filing.

Color combinations. The filing must identify the colors precisely and show how they are applied to the goods. The distinctiveness argument almost always has to be an acquired-distinctiveness argument, which in practice means the filing is only realistic for a brand with years of Chinese sales in that exact scheme.

Three-dimensional marks. The filing must show the sign as it is actually used on the goods or packaging. This is where brands most often file the wrong thing -- a point worth a line of its own in the table below.

Which Mark Type to File, and When

One practical note that saves an official fee and a refusal: a logo that looks three-dimensional is not a three-dimensional mark. Depth, shading and perspective in a flat image do not make the sign a 3D mark, and filing it as one invites a functionality objection under Article 18. Flat logo artwork with depth cues should be filed as a figurative or composite mark.

What It Costs

A non-traditional mark is still one application in one class. The official fee is RMB 270 per class for electronic filing -- about USD 40 at the October 2026 reference rate of 6.7180 CNY per USD -- covering up to 10 items, with RMB 27 per additional item. Paper filing is RMB 300 per class, about USD 45. The full fee ladder across class counts and the electronic versus paper channel is in the China trademark registration cost breakdown.

The official fee is not where the money goes. The cost sits in the description drafting, the sample preparation, and above all the acquired-distinctiveness evidence -- surveys, dated advertising, sales records and market reports covering the Chinese public. A sound mark filed without a use record is a donation with paperwork.

The Veteran's View: File the Word Mark First, Always

The question that comes up in almost every consultation on this topic is whether a brand should register its jingle instead of, or alongside, its name. The answer has not changed in a decade, and the basics of registering a trademark in China still start with the word.

Register the word mark first. It is the cheapest filing, the broadest protection, and the one that platform complaint systems, customs recordation and infringement claims all run on. A brand with a registered word mark has standing everywhere. A brand with a registered sound mark and no word mark has an interesting asset and no practical enforcement position.

Then, if the brand has a genuinely distinctive audio or motion asset that it has used in China for years, consider the non-traditional filing as a supplement. The brands that succeed with these filings are not the ones that filed early. They are the ones that filed with a use record attached.

This ordering matters more in China than in most markets. China runs a strict first-to-file register, which is exactly why how China's first-to-file trademark system works rewards filing the plain word mark on day one: the brand that reaches the office first controls the name, and a sound or motion filing can never repair a word mark somebody else already owns.

The 2027 law makes non-traditional marks more available. It does not make them easier to prove.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can a foreign brand register a sound mark in China?

Yes. Sound marks have been registrable since May 1, 2014, and Article 14 of the 2026 revision keeps them on the list of registrable signs. The difficulty is not availability but distinctiveness: sound mark applications are refused far more often than they are approved, so the filing normally needs a use record behind it.

2. How many sound marks has China actually registered?

There is no published CNIPA total. Practitioner tallies of CNIPA filings put sound mark practice from 2014 to 2023 at roughly 885 applications with roughly 39 registrations -- a success rate near four percent. Treat the figures as an industry estimate rather than an official statistic, and as the single most useful reason to prepare evidence before spending money on a sound filing.

3. What was China's first registered sound mark?

China Radio International's broadcast program opening, filed on May 4, 2014 and registered in 2016 in Classes 38 and 41. It is a short musical phrase used to identify a broadcaster, which is close to the ideal profile for a sound mark. The office required three rounds of correction and extensive use evidence before approving it.

4. What is a dynamic mark, and is it registrable in China?

A dynamic mark is a motion sequence, animation or moving sign used to identify a commercial source. Article 14 of the 2026 revision adds dynamic marks to the list of registrable signs, effective January 1, 2027. Detailed filing formats are being settled in the draft Trademark Examination Guidelines CNIPA published on September 28, 2026, with comments closing November 12, 2026, so confirm the format before filing.

5. What is needed to file a sound mark in China?

A description of the sound using a stave or numbered musical notation, a written description where notation alone is not enough, and an audio sample; the description and the sample must match. Where the sound is not inherently distinctive, evidence of acquired distinctiveness through use in the Chinese market is normally what carries the application.

6. Can a color or three-dimensional mark be refused as functional?

Yes. Article 18 excludes signs consisting solely of what results from the nature of the goods, what is necessary to obtain a technical result, or what gives the goods substantial value. The exclusion applies expressly to three-dimensional marks, color combinations, sounds and dynamic marks, and a flat logo that merely looks three-dimensional does not qualify as a 3D mark at all.

7. Is a non-traditional mark a substitute for a word mark?

No, and treating it as one is the most common strategic error in this area. The word mark carries the enforcement weight -- platform complaints, customs recordation, infringement claims. A non-traditional mark is a supplement, worth filing only where the asset is genuinely distinctive and has a documented use history in China.

The Bottom Line

The 2027 law widens the door for non-traditional marks, and that is a genuine improvement. It does not change what a trademark has to do.

A sign gets registered when it identifies a commercial source and can be shown to have done so. For words, that is easy. For sounds, colors, shapes and motion, it usually requires years of documented use in the Chinese market -- and, as the QQ case shows, sometimes two rounds of litigation on top.

File the word mark first. Then decide, with evidence rather than enthusiasm, whether the jingle or the animated logo deserves a filing of its own.

Sources:

• Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (2026 Revision) -- CNIPA official text, adopted June 26, 2026, effective January 1, 2027 (Articles 14, 17, 18, 73)
• CNIPA notice on the draft Trademark Examination Guidelines -- published September 28, 2026, comments closing November 12, 2026
• CNIPA Trademark Fee Guide -- official fee schedule for registration by class and item count
• Supreme People's Court Intellectual Property Court -- published judgments on trademark distinctiveness, including the QQ notification tone case