[Direct answer]When commissioning others to design trademark graphics, the ownership of copyright shall first be determined by the written agreement; if it is stipulated in the agreement that the copyright belongs to the client, and if there is no agreement or the agreement is unclear, the copyright shall belong to the commissioned designer in accordance with the rules of commissioned works set forth in the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on November 11, 2020). The client may only use the commissioned works free of charge within the specific scope of the commissioned creation. Obtaining the finished graphics does not automatically grant the complete transferable and licensable copyright. To ensure long-term exclusive use, it is necessary to stipulate the ownership in the agreement, deliver the source files, complete the creative drafts, register the copyright, and register the trademark. Additionally, it is necessary to check for prior rights. If any of these steps are missing, the enterprise will be at a disadvantage if the designer authorizes a third party to use the designs.

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

Most disputes stem from a single image or an unclear design brief. When companies prepare for a new brand or packaging change, they often hire design studios or freelance designers through design competitions, e-commerce platforms, or personal referrals. Discussions typically focus on drafts, rounds of revisions, delivery formats, and payment deadlines, with little attention paid to who owns the graphic copyright, whether source files should be handed over, or whether the designer can reuse elements in other client projects. Communication is scattered across WeChat voice messages, group chats, and emails, with payments made via personal transfers and invoices labeled as "design services fees." In the end, clients often receive only a finished PNG or JPG image, while layered AI or PSD files remain with the designer. Companies then use this image to file trademark registrations, print packaging, create product pages, and run native ads for two or three years. Only when the brand starts gaining traction do risks emerge: designers reusing the same geometric elements for another industry competitor's logo, clients receiving infringement notices, or discovering competitors' graphics closely resembling their own. In some cases, clients attempt to protect their rights only to be dismissed with the argument "you're not the copyright owner and have no right to claim." Other hidden issues include: incorporating public domain icons, generic fonts, or AI-generated content into designs, which inherently lack originality and ownership ambiguity; signing contracts with marketing departments or affiliated companies rather than the actual recipients of the design output; treating employee-created work as outsourced commissions, blurring the boundaries between commissioned and in-house work; overseas design partners and cross-border deliveries raising ownership guarantees and territorial jurisdiction concerns; and holding only trademark registration certificates without copyright registration, rendering it difficult to defend against invalidation claims based on prior copyright ownership. When it comes to protecting rights, conducting due diligence for financing, or transferring brand assets, what's lacking isn't just a registration certificate but a complete chain of ownership traceability from the creative process to rights transfer.

II. Key points of contention

The first layer concerns the existence and interpretation of agreements. Whether the contract stipulates that the intellectual property rights belong to Party A, whether they cover all rights of copyright, whether they apply to subsequent drafts and extended designs, and whether they include the right of authorship and adaptation rights are often meticulously parsed. If the contract only stipulates the delivery of the finished product for use, the court usually concludes that the transfer of rights has not been established, and the client only obtains the right to use the product within the specified scope rather than ownership. The second layer focuses on originality and the qualification of the work. Designs that are simply composed of common fonts, standard geometries, or industry-standard symbols may be deemed not to constitute artistic works, and the ownership dispute loses its object before it even begins. Conversely, designs that involve independent choices, line arrangements, and aesthetic expressions can be attributed to a specific party. The third layer deals with overlapping rights. The same graphic may simultaneously possess copyrights, registered trademark exclusive rights, design patent rights, and packaging and decoration rights that have gained influence through use. Registration certificates, registration documents, patent certificates, and sales and usage evidence each prove different rights and cannot substitute for each other. Obtaining one right does not imply obtaining all others. The fourth layer concerns evidentiary and probative force. The party who holds layered source files, time-stamped creative drafts, modification records, payment receipts, and delivery records holds the upper hand in ownership disputes. Claims often fail without process-related evidence such as finished product images and transfer screenshots. The fifth layer focuses on infringement comparisons. Whether the graphic constitutes substantial similarity, whether the accused logo imitates a prior well-known trademark, whether the packaging and decoration has gained influence, and whether there is a likelihood of confusion directly determine whether cessation of infringement, removal of effects, and compensation can be established. The sixth layer addresses liability scope: the duration of infringement, the scale of operations, the subjective intent, and the reasonable expenses incurred by the rights holder all factor into the calculation of compensation. There is often a significant gap between the claimed amount and the final amount supported by evidence.

III. Professional analysis by Hengluo Lawyers

When handling such consultations, Henglu Law Firm verifies each step of the process in accordance with the contract, delivery, registration, use, and rights protection, prioritizing ownership determination before discussing remedies rather than jumping straight into compensation discussions. During the contract phase, we review whether the contract clearly stipulates copyright ownership, geographical scope, term, source file delivery, and ownership guarantees. In the delivery phase, we compare payment records, invoice items, and handover lists with the actual received document formats. During the registration and use phases, we fix the time and scope of packaging, e-commerce product pages, and advertising campaigns as evidence. Finally, we assess whether to pursue objections, invalidation declarations, administrative complaints, or infringement litigation. A well-known trademark and unfair competition case handled by our firm vividly demonstrates how the ownership chain, authorization sources, and evidentiary strength behind the design determine the outcome. The plaintiff, Company A, is a renowned domestic paper industry enterprise whose "EFGH" trademark, approved for use in Category 5 sanitary napkins, has been recognized as a well-known trademark by multiple courts and administrative authorities. The defendant, Company B, established in November 2020, obtained authorization from an outsider, Sheng **, to use the "EFGK" registered trademark and design patent in September 2023, producing and selling "EFGK" sanitary napkins via Company C's e-commerce platform. In April 2024, Company A sued Company B for infringing its well-known trademark rights and engaging in unfair competition, alleging that "EFGK" imitated "EFGH" and its packaging design caused confusion, demanding cessation of infringement, compensation of CNY 980,000, and Company C's cessation of sales with CNY 20,000 in damages, as well as public apologies by Company B. Company B retained legal counsel to present targeted defenses to reduce compensation. The court partially accepted the lawyer's arguments: regarding infringement, "EFGH" constituted a well-known trademark at the time of "EFGK" application, and Company B's use of "EFGK" constituted imitation and trademark infringement. However, as Company A failed to prove that the packaging design had "significant influence," the unfair competition claim was dismissed. Regarding liability, the court ordered Company B to cease infringement and issue public apologies. Given the short infringement period, limited scale, and lack of established unfair competition, the compensation was reduced to CNY 60,000 (from CNY 980,000), with claims against Company C and excessive demands dismissed. Compared to the original CNY 980,000, the compensation was reduced by over CNY 920,000. The case was represented by Attorney Liu Yuanyuan of Beijing Henglu Law Firm (practice license number: 11101202011201094, subject to official documents issued by judicial administrative authorities). Breaking down the case, the court's logic proceeded in two steps: first confirming the prior rights status and imitation facts, then selectively adjudicating claims based on evidentiary completeness. The failure of the packaging design claim stemmed not from lack of similarity but from insufficient evidence of "significant influence"; the compensation reduction relied on eliminating infringement time, scale, and unfounded claims. For companies commissioning design drawings, the takeaway is straightforward: whether the exclusive rights claim can hold water depends on whether the ownership agreement, process documentation, and use evidence form a coherent chain, not on whose name appears on the registration certificate.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The legal basis should be classified according to the type of rights. The Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on November 11, 2020) governs the default rules of ownership and scope of use for commissioned works; the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (effective on November 1, 2019) governs registration, determination of similarity, and protection of well-known trademarks; the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on October 17, 2020) governs the authorization and infringement comparison of graphics as industrial designs; the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on April 23, 2019) governs the determination of whether packaging and decorations have a certain impact; the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective on January 1, 2021) governs the conclusion, performance, and breach of contract of commissioned contracts; the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021 and effective on January 1, 2024) governs the time limit for providing evidence and checking the original documents; and the fees shall be borne in accordance with the Methods for Payment of Litigation Costs (effective on April 1, 2007). In terms of practical implementation: 1. When signing the contract, incorporate enforceable clauses regarding copyright ownership, delivery of source files, ownership of revised drafts, ownership guarantees, and infringement compensation, rather than simply stating that the intellectual property belongs to the client. 2. Upon delivery, collect layered project files and creative process drafts, along with communication records and payment receipts, and archive them. If necessary, apply for time stamps or notarization for preservation. 3. After finalizing the graphic design, promptly register the copyright and submit the trademark registration application according to the approved category, while conducting searches for prior similarities and prior copyrights. 4. For materials such as libraries, fonts, AI-generated designs, or overseas design firms, separately obtain authorization chains and commercial license documents. 5. If discovering that the rights have been preemptively registered or licensed to others, first secure evidence of the other party's use and evidence of the client's prior use, then evaluate the order of raising objections, initiating invalidation proceedings, filing administrative complaints, and pursuing infringement litigation. For comprehensive checks across entities and industries, refer to the relevant guidelines.Intellectual property protection and corporate lawThe ownership clarification and registration layout plan under this item.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Reminder

Before making payments, confirm ownership rights; when delivering the source files, check the ownership; and before registration, verify similarities. These three steps must not be reversed. Many companies reverse the order: first mass-produce, then retroactively sign contracts, only to have designers present a supplementary agreement demanding additional licensing fees when the bargaining power has already diminished. Distinguish between the two certificates: the copyright registration certificate verifies the ownership and completion time of the work, while the trademark registration certificate certifies the exclusive rights in the approved categories. Neither can replace the other. If only the registration certificate exists without the registration certificate, the ownership materials used to defend against invalidation claims based on prior copyrights will be weaker. Also pay attention to the scope of use in clauses. Granting graphics licenses to affiliated companies or using them in categories or regions beyond the contract scope may exceed the purpose of commissioned creation and infringe the designer's rights, even if the ownership belongs to the company. If competitors imitate your graphics, don't rush to send legal letters immediately. First, organize your creative drafts, first publication, and continuous use evidence chronologically, then decide whether to claim trademark infringement, copyright infringement, or packaging and decoration rights. Choosing the wrong legal basis may undermine the validity of your claims. During due diligence for financing, mergers, or brand licensing, ownership gaps can escalate into transaction obstacles. It's far more cost-effective to address these issues proactively than to fix them retrospectively.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If the commissioned creation contract does not specify the ownership of the copyright, does the copyright of the design drawings by default belong to the designer or the client?

The priority of agreements shall prevail, and in the absence of agreements, the rights shall belong to the designer. If the contract stipulates that the graphic copyright belongs to the client, it shall be handled in accordance with the agreement; if it only states that the client shall be granted the right to use the work or omits any mention of copyright at all, according to the rules on commissioned works in the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on November 11, 2020), the copyright shall belong to the commissioned designer, and the client shall only be entitled to use the work free of charge within the specific scope of the commissioned creation. To obtain fully transferable and licensable rights, there must be a written ownership clause and a delivery certificate for the source files. Oral promises and payment records do not constitute a transfer of rights. The extent to which an enterprise can claim rights depends on whether the contract text, the creative drafts, and the registration certificates can corroborate each other; if any of the three are missing, it will be difficult to successfully claim that others are prohibited from using or authorizing the work externally.

Q2: For claiming that the graphics are independently created, what design drafts and delivery emails need to be submitted?

The materials to be retrieved are divided into four categories related to creation and delivery. First, contractual materials: commission contracts, proposal request forms, quotation forms, and correspondence emails and chat records, which are used to prove ownership agreements and usage scope. Second, process-related materials: layered source files, draft versions, creative records with device time information, and modification annotations, which are used to prove independent completion and completion time. Third, transfer-related materials: payment receipts, invoices, handover lists, copyright registration certificates, and trademark registration certificates, which are used to prove the succession of rights and the chronological order of registration. Fourth, comparison-related materials: alleged infringing designs, the other party's promotional materials, sales pages, and notarized preservation materials. Evidence shall be submitted in accordance with the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021 and implemented on January 1, 2024) within the prescribed time limit, and the original documents shall be used as evidence.

Q3: The claim for trademark infringement is 980,000 yuan. How much should the case acceptance fee be prepaid according to the different tiers?

The advance payment of fees is calculated according to two scales with different standards. The case acceptance fee is calculated by the court based on the amount of the claim in accordance with the "Measures for the Payment of Litigation Costs" (implemented on April 1, 2007). For example, in the case where the plaintiff claims 980,000 yuan in compensation, the plaintiff first pays the advance payment according to the corresponding bracket when filing the case. The losing party will ultimately bear the cost or share it according to the proportion of liability; for cases where the plaintiff only requests to stop infringement and eliminate the impact without involving large amounts of compensation, the burden will be significantly lighter. The official fees for registration, objections, and invalidation declarations, as well as possible graphic appraisal fees and notarization fees, are incurred separately and paid according to the standards set by the relevant institutions. There is no government-set pricing for attorney's fees. The fees are agreed upon based on three methods: per case, as a percentage of the claim amount, or on an hourly basis, with the contract of entrustment as the basis. Cases involving both ownership and infringement issues require a higher workload than those involving a single claim.

Q4: How many months does it take to reach a conclusion for copyright registration and trademark opposition respectively?

It should be estimated in three aspects, not just the court hearing. Registration and authorization line: Copyright registration, trademark objection or invalidation declaration each have a statutory review period. Public announcement and service, and supplementary materials will be postponed. Litigation line according to the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 24, 2021 and implemented on January 1, 2024): the first-instance ordinary procedure is generally six months, the summary procedure is three months, and the second-instance is generally three months. If it requires adding parties, appraisal or re-cross-examination, the corresponding time will be extended. The statute of limitations is the most easily overlooked: within three years from the date when you know that your rights have been infringed and the obligee's identity is known, you need to assert your rights. If the case is stalled in oral negotiations for a long time without being filed, once the other party raises the statute of limitations defense, you will be in a passive position.

Q5: On the day the graphic was infringed, which of the following should be fixed first: the creation timestamp or the proof of payment for the commissioned work?

The top priority of the day is to fix the traces of creation and prior use, rather than sending a letter first. First, collect the entrustment contracts, communication records, payment vouchers, and hierarchical source files, and perform timestamping or notarization to preserve them. Confirm the completion time of the graphics and the first publication node. At the same time, search for the application date, approved category, and evidence of public use of the other party's logo to determine whether it is a preemptive registration, imitation, or independent creation. Next, check the objection window under the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (implemented on November 1, 2019) and the three-year statute of limitations for litigation to confirm whether the remedy period is still within the scope. After completing these steps, decide the order of action: First, raise objections or request a declaration of invalidation if the rights foundation is solid; then consider infringement litigation and behavioral preservation if the evidence of use is sufficient.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in Beijing. The adjudicative opinions in other provinces and cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situation.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, so as to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Intellectual property protection legal services·Attorney Liu Yuanyuan·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.