The short answer
Earlier unregistered use should not simply be ignored. Under Article 14 of the Swiss Trade Mark Protection Act, a trademark owner cannot prohibit an earlier user from continuing within the previous scope of use. That is not an unlimited trademark right for the user, nor a blanket answer on whether your filing and planned use are safe.
Distinguish earlier use from registered rights
Article 14 concerns another person’s use of the sign before your trademark was filed. It protects continued use within its previous scope. It does not automatically turn that use into an exclusive right that can freely expand across all products, regions or business activities developed later.
Both timing and the actual earlier activity therefore matter to your decision. An early domain purchase alone does not establish how a sign was used in business. Conversely, absence of a registration does not make every previous use legally irrelevant. Examine the facts before issuing prohibitions or making broad assurances about exclusivity.
Document the previous scope of activity
Collect dated offers, invoices, catalogues and verifiable website material where lawfully available. Connect the form of the sign, goods, services and previous distribution activity with the relevant dates. Distinguish allegations from documented facts. The boundary depends on particular circumstances, not merely on someone saying that they were first to use the name.
Article 14 allows the right of continued use to transfer only together with the business. It should therefore not be treated like an independently tradable registration. Company-name issues or other legal questions may also need separate review. Identify those possible grounds individually instead of grouping every position under the label of trademark ownership.
Sources: Fedlex: Trade Mark Protection Act, Article 14 · IPI: intellectual property belonging to competitors
Adapt the new filing strategy to the conflict
Complement register searching with reasonable market and name checks. The IPI explains that registration does not itself rule out earlier conflicts. A registration is therefore not an official assurance that you can successfully remove every existing business operating under a similar name from the market.
Before substantial investment, assess whether a more distinctive choice, an agreement or adjusted plans would help. A business that used the name first should also plan protection for future development separately. Filing can be relevant to that plan, but it does not retrospectively expand earlier use or cure an existing conflict.
Sources: IPI: risk of conflict with earlier trademarks · IPI: intellectual property belonging to competitors
What you can do now
- Document the start and actual scope of the earlier use.
- Assess registration, continued use and possible other claims separately.
- Review the intended future activity before filing and investing.
Frequently asked questions
Can I stop every earlier user once I register?
No. Statutory continued use within its previous scope can prevent a prohibition. Whether the conditions are met and how far that scope extends must be assessed against the actual use.
Can the earlier user then expand without limits?
Article 14 does not establish an unlimited right to expand. It refers to the previous scope of use. New activities and any other possible legal grounds require separate assessment.
Sources: Fedlex: Trade Mark Protection Act, Article 14 · IPI: intellectual property belonging to competitors