Trademark Protection in the Defence and Security Sector: Key Considerations for EU Companies

In today’s heightened geopolitical climate, intellectual property protection is more than a matter of corporate housekeeping – it is a strategic necessity. For companies operating in the defence, security, and dual-use technology sectors, trademarks play a unique role: they embody technological credibility, serve as identifiers in sensitive supply chains, and support compliance in some of the most regulated markets in the world. In the EU, where businesses must navigate EUIPO and WIPO procedures alongside national rules, export controls, and sanctions regimes, understanding how to approach trademark protection is essential for maintaining competitiveness and legal certainty. Choosing the Right Trademark Classifications Defence and security goods do not fit neatly into a dedicated category under the Nice Classification. Instead, trademark protection depends on the actual function of the goods and services. Common classes include:

• Class 13 – Weapons, ammunition, explosives, defence hardware;
• Class 25 – Uniforms, tactical clothing, protective gear;
• Class 9 / 42 – Cybersecurity software, encrypted systems, command-and-control platforms, sensors, night-vision devices.

Because many defence products are dual-use, companies must also consider whether their goods fall under EU export control regulations. In some cases, it may be advisable to file separate trademarks for civilian and military applications, especially when the goods fall within sensitive or restricted categories. Avoiding Generic or Descriptive Signs Terms like “defence,” “security,” “tactical,” “military,” or “armored” are commonly used in the sector – and commonly rejected by EUIPO or other office for being descriptive or non-distinctive. To strengthen the chance of registration:

• Pair descriptive elements with distinctive or invented terms (e.g., “AURORA DEFENCE”, “BLACK SHIELD SYSTEMS”);
• Choose figurative or stylized logos;
• Build acquired distinctiveness through consistent market use and documentation.

Distinctiveness is both a legal requirement and a commercial advantage, particularly where open marketing is limited by confidentiality. Heraldic Elements and Official Insignia: Proceed with Care Trademarks that imitate or resemble state emblems, military insignia, flags, or official badges face automatic refusal under EU and international law (including Article 6ter of the Paris Convention). Even partial resemblance may be enough to imply a false connection with governmental or military authority. Companies should avoid combining: National colours, heraldic shields, eagles or crowns, symbolic military imagery. This is especially important in the security sector, where consumers and authorities may easily assume governmental affiliation. Security, Secrecy, and Sanction-Sensitive Filings Trademark filings in the defence field can be blocked or scrutinized due to national security, public policy, or secrecy concerns. Marks referring to: classified projects, specific military units, restricted equipment, or sensitive locations may be refused to prevent disclosure of confidential information. Since 2022, sanctions have added a further layer of risk. Filing or maintaining trademarks connected to sanctioned entities or technologies (e.g., related to Russia, Belarus, Iran, Syria) may constitute the provision of prohibited legal or business services. EU companies should conduct ownership and supply-chain due diligence prior to filing. Public Policy and Ethical Branding Branding in the defence sector must align with EU values and standards. Marks that imply violence or aggression (e.g., “KillerTech,” “WarMaster,” “Annihilator”) may be rejected on public-policy grounds. Similarly, marks referencing conflict zones or politically sensitive regions (“Kyiv Defence,” “Gaza Armor,” “Kurdistan Tactical”) may be refused to prevent diplomatic tension. A strong defence trademark should communicate integrity, reliability, and professionalism, not hostility. Madrid System vs. National Filings: Managing Disclosure Risks Although the Madrid System offers efficient and cost-effective international expansion, it is not always suitable for defence-related trademarks. All Madrid filings are automatically published, including detailed descriptions of goods and ownership. For confidential technologies, this can reveal more than intended. Best practice:

• Use Madrid for low-risk regions (EU, UK, US, Canada, Australia).
• File nationally in jurisdictions requiring bespoke wording or confidentiality (e.g., Turkey, China, Israel, Middle East).
• Adjust or limit goods specifications – e.g., omit Class 13 (weapons) in certain markets.

The Challenge of Proving Genuine Use In most EU jurisdictions, a mark must be used within five years to remain valid. However, many defence trademarks are used: in closed procurement markets, on classified documents, in restricted supply chains or only in B2G (business-to-government) contexts. To avoid non-use challenges, companies should maintain confidential but verifiable evidence: tender submissions, contracts and invoices, export licenses, usage logs for secure software. This documentation can be submitted under seal in disputes. Difficulties in Enforcement Enforcing trademarks in the defence sector may also present distinct challenges:

• Infringements often occur in procurement, subcontracting, or closed-door tenders;
• Companies may be restricted from revealing sensitive details in litigation;
• Customs authorities may not have access to technical data necessary to identify infringing goods;
• Dual-use products complicate enforcement because civilian versions may legally circulate.

As a result, proactive governance is crucial:

• Clear IP clauses in contracts;
• Internal monitoring;
• Confidential compliance mechanisms;
• Collaboration with specialized enforcement teams.

Conclusion: Strategic IP for a Sensitive Industry For EU companies operating in the defence and security sector, trademark protection is far more than brand management – it is a matter of regulatory compliance, commercial integrity, and national security alignment. A robust IP strategy should combine:

• Distinctive branding,
• Diligent risk assessment,
• Seamless coordination with export-control and sanctions teams,
• Secure documentation practices, and
• Thoughtful international filing choices.

In an industry shaped by confidentiality and global tension, well-structured trademarks help ensure resilience, trust, and competitive advantage – today and in the long term.

Protect your Trademark

Contact our Head of Intellectual Property Practice, Vilija Viešūnaitė, and secure professional protection for your brand and innovations.