CYBERPEACE v CyberPeace Institute
Federal Administrative Court, judgment of 22 September 2026, B-1017/2024 and B-1079/2024
What was the case about?
The CyberPeace Foundation, based in India, owns Swiss word mark No. 749'810 «CYBERPEACE», filed on 7 February 2020 and registered for numerous services in class 42 in the field of computer security. The CyberPeace Institute, based in Geneva, owns Swiss word/figurative mark No. 790'720 «CyberPeace Institute Humanitarian Cybersecurity Center (fig.)», filed on 5 December 2022 and registered for goods and services in classes 16, 25, 38, 41 and 42. Based on its earlier mark, the CyberPeace Foundation filed an opposition on 15 March 2023 and requested revocation of the younger mark.
The IPI partially upheld the opposition by decision of 18 January 2024 and revoked the contested mark for all services in classes 38 and 42 as well as for part of the services in class 41. For the goods in classes 16 and 25 and the remaining services in class 41, it dismissed the opposition. Both parties appealed this decision to the Federal Administrative Court. The court examined the similarity of the services and the similarity of the signs. It found that the opposing mark is fully incorporated into the contested mark and remains recognisable therein as an independent sign element. Even assuming a slightly reduced distinctive character of the opposing mark and slightly increased attention of the relevant public, it affirmed a likelihood of confusion. To the extent that the additional elements of the contested mark prevent direct confusion, there is in any event a risk that the relevant public will assume economic or organisational connections between the mark owners. The Federal Administrative Court dismissed both appeals and confirmed the partial revocation. The procedural costs totalling CHF 4,500 were imposed on the parties in equal halves; no party compensation was awarded.
Partial revocation confirmed
The Federal Administrative Court confirms the partial revocation of the «CyberPeace Institute Humanitarian Cybersecurity Center (fig.)» mark for the services in classes 38 and 42 as well as for part of class 41. For the goods in classes 16 and 25 and the remaining services in class 41, the mark remains registered. Both appeals are dismissed, with the procedural costs of CHF 4,500 imposed on the parties in equal halves.
What you can learn from this
Before choosing a name, it should be checked whether earlier identical or similar marks exist for identical or similar goods and services. If an earlier sign is fully incorporated into one's own mark and remains recognisable therein as an independent element, there is a considerable risk of confusion, even with a slightly reduced distinctive character and increased attention of the relevant public. Additions such as «Institute» or descriptive indications do not reliably eliminate the likelihood of confusion.
SMEs should actively monitor their marks, in particular by searching for similar signs in the Swissreg register and filing oppositions within the deadline in the event of a collision. In defence, it should be examined whether the contested mark fully contains the earlier sign and whether the claimed goods and services are identical or similar. An opposition may also be only partially successful; procedural costs are generally allocated according to the outcome. Early trade mark clarification and a clear, distinctive choice of name are more advantageous than subsequent litigation.
Case ticker
This ticker follows the case automatically: new decisions appear here as soon as they are published in official sources.
Monitored automatically · Status: 23.10.2026
- 22.09.2026 The Federal Administrative Court confirms the partial revocation of the «CyberPeace Institute Humanitarian Cybersecurity Center (fig.)» mark for likelihood of confusion with CYBERPEACE. Source
Entries are generated automatically from official sources. Decisions may be appealed and are not necessarily final.
Sources
Federal Administrative Court, judgment of 22 September 2026, B-1017/2024 and B-1079/2024.
Is your brand name strong enough?
Activate free basic protection and keep an eye on your trade mark and its environment.
This article was generated automatically from published decisions, is for information purposes and does not constitute legal advice.