As we step into 2025, IP law in the European Union is set to undergo interesting changes. This article outlines the most anticipated developments in all areas of IP law. From landmark court cases to pivotal legislative reforms, we explore the key trends and decisions that will shape the future of IP in the EU.

Trademark trails

Regarding trademarks, a number of cases are already on the CJEU's plate, including:

• The CJEU is expected to hand down its judgment in the high-profile IKEA case, where a Belgian court seeks guidance on balancing protection for the holders of famous trademarks with the right of freedom of expression.
• In the CeramTec case, the French Cour de Cassation has asked the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on applicability of the autonomous EU concept of bad faith, specifically whether the grounds for invalidity due to bad faith overlap with other grounds for refusal, such as the functional shape exclusion.
• The Sanchez case also concerns the concept of bad faith. The CJEU will need to address several questions on this concept and the principle of estoppel. Specifically, the questions involve whether setting a specific time limit for bringing an invalidity action creates an expectation that prevents later claims of bad faith, and if actively opposing overlapping EU trademarks within a reasonable period constitutes a remedy to the situation.
• The French Cour the Cassation made another referral in the Societe PMJC case, which concerns the revocation of a trademark consisting of a designer's surname if its use misleads the public into believing the designer is still involved in the design of the goods, even after its assignment.

In addition to these referrals, the following cases appealing several EU General Court's decisions are worth keeping an eye on:

• In the Shopify case and the Ape Tees case, the CJEU will address Brexit implications as it reviews two decisions by the General Court concerning EUIPO Board of Appeals judgments, decided after the Brexit transition period expired.
• In 2025, the CJEU might also deliver judgments on the legal concept of bad faith (in the Dekoback case), the ever fascinating 3D marks (in the Peikko Group case) and the concept of genuine use with regard to goods for export purposes outside of the EU (in the W.B. Studio as di Wivian Bodini & C case).

Patent peaks

In the area of patents, we anticipate progress on the EU's proposals to reform several regimes, such as:

• the much debated 2023 proposal for a new Regulation on Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) (for information on the key changes, see our previous article);
• four proposals from 2023 covering significant reforms to the regime for Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs), which include creating a Unitary Supplementary Protection Certificate (USPC) and introducing a centralised granting procedure; and
• the 2023 proposal on compulsory patent licensing for crisis management, covering rules on procedure and conditions for granting a compulsory EU-wide licence to address a crisis in the EU.

In addition, the following two important cases are pending at the CJEU level:

• A ruling by the Grand Chamber is expected in the BSH/Electrolux case in 2025. The matter was referred to the CJEU by a Swedish court of appeal and deals with the question about whether a court in one EU member state (in this case, Sweden) has jurisdiction over patent rights in other countries (in this case, Turkey) when the defendant, who is domiciled in the court's country, raises arguments about the patent's validity. If the CJEU decides to follow the Advocate General's opinion in this case, this means departing from its earlier decisions regarding cross-border litigation.
• In the Halozyme case, a Czech court referred questions to the CJEU about the interpretation of "active ingredient" in the SPC Regulation.

Copyright currents

In terms of copyright law developments, it is interesting to note that following two recent high-profile CJEU judgments in RAAP and Kwantum, several EU Member States have expressed the need for a legislative proposal to the European Commission. This proposal would address the rules and boundaries of the international scope of EU copyright and neighbouring rights law.

For the CJEU, its focus will remain on the impact of the Digital Single Market Directive:

• In the Meta Platforms Ireland case, an Italian administrative court of first instance has asked the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Article 15 DSM Directive, dealing with the protection of press publications concerning online uses.
• In the Thuiskopie case, brought by Dutch Supreme Court, the CJEU will need to clarify whether offline streaming copies fall under the private copying exception.
• The Dutch Supreme Court has also requested a preliminary ruling in the Anne Frank copyright case. The case addresses the tension between the internet's global reach and its national treatment under copyright law. Can effective geoblocking be the answer? For more information, see our previous article on this case.
• The German Bundesverwaltungsgericht is looking for clarification of the interpretation of the scope of Article 17 DSM Directive – about the use of protected content by online content-sharing service providers – in the Austro-Mechana and AKM case.
• In late 2024, the Belgian Cour Constitutionelle referred questions to the CJEU in the Streamz case. These questions also concern the interpretation of the rules on fair remuneration of authors and performers on online streaming platforms.

Other topics the CJEU will most likely rule on in 2025 are the following:

• In the Pelham II case, the CJEU will again, following Pelham I, rule on sampling. Specifically, in Pelham II the CJEU is to rule on the lawfulness of sampling in the light of the pastiche copyright exception.
• A Romanian court has referred questions to the CJEU in the Institutul G. Călinescu case. The questions concern the criteria for when a derivative work can be protected under copyright law.
• In the VHC 2 Seniorenresidenz case, the German Bundesgerichtshof has referred questions concerning the concept of "communication to the public", in the context of residents of a commercially operated retirement home receiving retransmitted broadcast programmes via the home's cable network.
• We also expect answers concerning joint authorship and the admissibility of infringement actions in the SACD case.

Creative crossroads

The CJEU will also address several cases that lie at the intersection of copyright and design rights. These include the Mio case and the Konektra (or USM Haller) case, which involve assessing the EU originality standard in copyright law in relation to works of applied art.

Design dunes

In 2025, the design law landscape will be reshaped by the long-awaited EU design reform. A significant part of the new EU Designs Regulation will take effect from 1 May 2025, and member states will probably begin transposing the new EU Designs Directive into their national legislation, with a deadline of 9 December 2027. In addition to renaming "community designs" to "European Union designs", one of the most notable changes will be the ability to register new types of designs, such as digital objects.

We can expect answers from the CJEU in several cases:

• In the LEGO case, a Hungarian court has referred questions to the CJEU regarding the interpretation of the technical exception in the Community Design Regulation in the context of an infringement issue.
• In the Deity Shoes case, brought by a Spanish court, the CJEU will need to further clarify the requirements for a design to be covered under the Community Design Regulation.
• The CJEU will also address a Belgian court's questions on determining infringement and, more specifically, on the moment to determine the perception of the informed user, in the Van Ratingen case.

Database dales

The Regulation on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data, also known as the European Data Act, entered into force last year and will start applying in September 2025. It will affect certain holders of data in databases as it will limit the scope of the Database Directive. The Database Directive provides for a sui generis database right, which is a special right granted to database creators to prevent extraction and reuse of substantial parts of their databases.

Article 43 of the Data Act makes clear that the sui generis database right does not apply "when data is obtained from or generated by a connected product or related service falling within the scope of this Regulation". This means that databases containing such data, including product data and service data related to the connected product, are not protected by the sui generis database right. Examples of connected products include smart home devices, wearables like smartwatches, and connected security systems.

Geographical indication groves

The EU Regulation on geographical indication (GI) protection for craft and industrial products (CIGIR) entered into force in 2023 and will fully apply from 1 December 2025. It establishes an EU-level system for protecting the names of European craft and industrial products. From 1 December, names meeting the regulation's requirements can be registered, providing protection across the entire EU.

Sectoral slopes: industry-specific IP developments

AI Act avenues

The Regulation on harmonised rules on artificial intelligence, also known as the AI Act, was adopted in 2024. While most provisions will apply from 2 August 2026, some key provisions will come into effect in 2025.

As of 2 February 2025, the general provisions of Chapter I and provisions on prohibited AI Acts in Chapter II will start to apply. These include the obligation of providers and deployers of AI systems to take measures to ensure that their staff and other persons dealing with the operation and use of their AI systems have a sufficient level of AI literacy of (Article 4), and a detailed list of AI practices (Article 5). Examples of such practices are AI practices that manipulate people subliminally, exploit vulnerabilities, or use social scoring to discriminate. It also bans AI systems that: predict criminal behaviour based solely on profiling, create facial recognition databases without consent, and infer emotions in workplaces or schools. Additionally, real-time biometric identification in public spaces for law enforcement is restricted to specific serious situations.

A significant portion of the AI Act, including Chapter V (obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models) and Chapter XII (penalties), takes effect on 2 August 2025. Providers of general-purpose AI models will need to maintain technical documentation, share detailed information about their AI systems, comply with EU copyright laws, and publish a summary of the training content. It is up to the EU Member States to lay down rules on penalties and other enforcement measures. Non-compliance with the prohibition of the AI practices referred to in Article 5 will result in administrative fines of up to EUR 35 million or, if the offender is an undertaking, up to 7% of its total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher. Penalties for providers of general-purpose AI models will apply from 2 August 2026.

Packaging pathways

Early this year, the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) was published, introducing a new set of rules at the EU level aimed at significantly reducing packaging waste and promoting sustainability. The regulation enters into force on 11 February 2025, with most provisions becoming applicable from 12 August 2026. Although this may seem far in the future, IP owners involved in packaging, regardless of material or use, should begin preparing now. In addition to waste reduction requirements, the new packaging standards, such as minimising weight and volume, new information and labelling requirements, and the push for sustainable packaging, will have significant implications for packaging designs.

The IP exception in Article 10 of the regulation provides an exception for certain distinctive packaging already protected by a design or trademark right in a member state at the time of entry into force. It also applies to packaged products or beverages benefiting from a geographical indication protected under EU law or covered by a quality scheme. Additionally, there is a transitional period for innovative packaging that presents significant improvements in functionality and environmental benefits.

The horizon ahead

The year 2025 promises to be a transformative period for intellectual property law in the European Union. With significant CJEU rulings and legislative reforms on the horizon, stakeholders should remain informed.

If you would like more details or background on any of these topics, feel free to reach out to our IP team.