Last updated 6 October 2026 — by Adrian Tan, SDM. Marketing guidance, not legal advice. Section numbers follow the 2020 Revised Editions of the Acts on Singapore Statutes Online; confirm anything campaign-critical with an IP lawyer or IPOS before you print.
A small circle with an R in it looks like decoration. On a Singapore product page, a pack shot or a sponsored post, it is a legal claim: it tells the customer that the name is a registered trade mark in Singapore. The same is true of “patented”, “patent pending” and “registered design”. Each of those words has its own offence behind it, and the maximum penalties run from a S$10,000 fine to a year in jail.
Most marketers never think about this because the claims arrive in the artwork. A brand owner sends a logo file with the ® already baked in. An overseas supplier’s packaging says “patented technology”. A copywriter adds “patent pending” to a Kickstarter-style launch page because it sounds credible. Nobody checks whether a registration or a live application actually sits behind the words, and nobody checks whether it is a Singapore one.
The short version
Four Singapore statutes make it an offence to claim intellectual property protection you do not have. A fifth, the consumer protection statute, catches the same claims when they mislead a buyer. Here is how they line up.
| Claim in your ad or on the pack | What must exist first | Statute | Maximum penalty |
|---|---|---|---|
| ™ after a name or logo | Nothing. You are simply claiming you use it as a mark | None | None |
| ® or “registered trade mark” | A registered Singapore trade mark (or a real foreign registration you clearly refer to) for those goods or services | Trade Marks Act s 51 | Fine up to S$10,000 |
| “Patented” or “patent” | A granted patent covering the product | Patents Act s 99 | Fine up to S$10,000, 12 months’ jail, or both |
| “Patent pending” or “patent applied for” | A live patent application (not refused, withdrawn or abandoned) | Patents Act s 100 | Fine up to S$10,000, 12 months’ jail, or both |
| “Registered design” | A registered design that has not expired | Registered Designs Act s 66 | Fine up to S$10,000, 12 months’ jail, or both |
| “Registered” geographical indication | A GI actually on the Singapore GI register | Geographical Indications Act s 25 | Fine up to S$10,000 |
| © notice | Nothing. Copyright is automatic in Singapore | No formal role | None |
™ versus ®: the difference that matters
™ is a statement of intent, not a legal status
No Singapore statute regulates the ™ symbol. IPOS describes it as informing others that you are using the name or logo as a trade mark, while noting that the mark “may not be registered”. You can put ™ next to a brand name the day you invent it.
® means “registered in Singapore”, by law
Section 51 of the Trade Marks Act 1998 makes it an offence to falsely represent that a mark is a registered trade mark, or to make a false representation about the goods or services it is registered for, where you know or have reason to believe the representation is false. The maximum is a fine of S$10,000.
The important part is section 51(2). It says that using the word “registered”, or any other word or symbol that refers to registration, in the course of trade in Singapore is treated as a claim of registration in Singapore. The ® symbol is exactly that kind of symbol. There is one exception: where it is shown that the reference is to registration somewhere else, and the mark really is registered there for the goods or services in question.
IPOS’s own guidance is blunt about timing: ® is only allowed once your trade mark’s status shows as “Registered”. A filed application does not count. Neither does a mark that has passed examination but is still in its opposition period. Until the certificate stage, the honest symbol is ™.
The “goods or services” half of the offence
Section 51 has a second limb that catches established brands. A trade mark is registered for particular classes of goods or services. If your mark is registered in Class 30 for coffee and you launch a branded tumbler, a ® on the tumbler’s listing suggests the mark is registered for drinkware when it is not. That is a false representation about the goods the registration covers.
Composition: the practical outcome
Section 105A of the Trade Marks Act lets the Registrar compound a prescribed offence. The composition sum is capped at the lower of half the maximum fine or S$5,000.
The ® trap for importers and e-commerce sellers
This is the scenario we see most often in e-commerce accounts. A Singapore company distributes a brand from Japan, Korea, Europe or the US. The packaging, the product photos and the brand’s own ad creative all carry ®. The mark is genuinely registered in its home country. It has never been filed in Singapore.
Under section 51(2), that ® on a Shopee listing, a Lazada store or a Singapore Meta ad is read as a claim of Singapore registration. The foreign-registration exception exists, but two conditions apply: the reference must be shown to be to the foreign registration, and the mark must really be registered there for those goods. A bare ® on a local listing does not show either.
The offence also requires that the person knew or had reason to believe the claim was false. An innocent reseller who had no idea may have a defence. A distributor who has been told, or whose own trade mark search came back empty, does not.
Three ways to fix it
- Register the mark in Singapore. The brand owner can file directly with IPOS or designate Singapore through the Madrid Protocol. This is the clean answer for any brand you plan to sell here for more than a season.
- Qualify the symbol. Add a line such as “® Registered trade mark in Japan” on the listing and, where practical, on a local sticker. That turns the claim into the kind of foreign reference section 51(2) allows, provided the foreign registration is real and covers the goods.
- Drop it from your own creative. You often cannot change imported packaging, but you control your listings, your ads and your website. Use ™ or no symbol at all in anything your team produces.
“Patented” and “patent pending”
Patent claims carry the heaviest penalties of the group, and they are the claims most likely to be written by someone with no idea whether a patent exists.
“Patented”: section 99 of the Patents Act
Section 99 makes it an offence to falsely represent that something you sell is a patented product. Applying the word “patent” or “patented”, or anything expressing or implying that the product is patented, counts as the representation. The maximum penalty is a fine of S$10,000, imprisonment for up to 12 months, or both.
There are two safety valves. Section 99(3) gives a reasonable grace period after a patent expires or is revoked, so you are not committing an offence the morning after the patent ends, as long as you update your materials within a reasonable time. Section 99(4) makes it a defence to show you used due diligence to avoid the offence.
“Patent pending”: section 100
Section 100 deals with claims that a patent has been applied for. It names the words “patent applied for” and “patent pending” expressly. It is an offence to use them where no application has been made, or where the application has been refused, withdrawn or abandoned. The penalty is the same as section 99: up to S$10,000, 12 months’ jail, or both. There is a grace period after refusal, withdrawal or abandonment, and a due-diligence defence.
That means “patent pending” is honest only while a real application is alive. It is not a polite way of saying “we think this is novel” or “we intend to file”. Start-ups launching a crowdfunding page or a pre-order campaign use this phrase constantly. If no application has been lodged, take it out.
Do not imply an official connection
Section 101 adds an offence for using words such as “Registry of Patents”, or anything implying an official connection with the patent office, with a penalty of up to S$5,000, 12 months’ jail, or both. A product page that says “certified by the Patent Office” or uses office-style seals to suggest government approval falls into this area.
The upside of marking properly: section 69
There is a commercial reason to mark products correctly, not only a compliance one. Under section 69, a patent owner cannot recover damages or an account of profits from an infringer who proves they were not aware, and had no reasonable grounds for supposing, that the patent existed. And section 69(2) says that marking a product “patent” or “patented” does not by itself give the infringer that awareness unless the patent number accompanies the words.
So “Patented” on its own is weaker than “Singapore Patent No. …” The number turns a marketing claim into notice that protects your damages claim against a copycat. If you own the patent, put the number on the pack, the product page and the manual.
“Registered design”
Designs protect how a product looks: its shape, configuration, pattern or ornament. The Registered Designs Act 2000 mirrors the patent provisions closely.
- Section 66(1) makes it an offence to falsely represent that a design applied to an article, a non-physical product or a set is registered. The maximum is a fine of S$10,000, 12 months’ jail, or both.
- Section 66(2) treats anything expressing or implying registration as the representation. That includes marks on a device that projects a non-physical product, such as a projected interface.
- Section 66(3) makes it an offence to keep marking an article as protected after the design right has expired.
- Section 39(2) is the design equivalent of the patent marking rule: marking “registered” does not defeat an innocent infringer’s defence unless the registration number accompanies the word.
Geographical indications: “Champagne-style” and friends
Geographical indications protect names that tell you where a product comes from and that carry a reputation tied to that place. The Geographical Indications Act 2014 matters most for food and drink marketing, and especially for wine and spirits.
Wines and spirits get absolute protection
Under section 4, an interested party can sue over the use of a geographical indication for a wine or spirit that does not originate in the place it names. The protection is unusually strong: it applies even if the true origin is stated, even if the indication is translated, and even if it is accompanied by words such as “kind”, “type”, “style” or “imitation”. So “Champagne-style sparkling wine” or “Scotch-type whisky” for a product from elsewhere is actionable, however honestly the label states where it was made.
Section 4(6) extends the same enhanced protection to registered geographical indications for certain agricultural products and foodstuffs listed in the Act’s Schedule. The use of a geographical indication inside a trade mark also counts as use, and there is an exception for a true reference to an ingredient. Singapore’s GI registry has been open since April 2019, following the EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement. Check the IPOS GI register for the specific name before you use it in copy; whether a given food name is registered decides which level of protection applies.
Claiming a GI is “registered”
Section 25 makes it an offence to falsely represent a geographical indication as registered, with a fine of up to S$10,000, using the same “word or symbol importing registration” deeming rule as the Trade Marks Act. Beyond that, the Act has no general criminal offence for misusing a GI. Enforcement is civil, by the producers or their associations, plus border measures that let customs detain goods.
For a marketer, the practical rule is simple. If a wine, spirit or protected food did not come from the place, do not use the place name in the product name, the ad copy or the hashtag, with or without “style”. Describe the product in your own words: “traditional-method sparkling wine from Australia” is fine. Our guide to alcohol advertising rules in Singapore covers the rest of the liquor-specific requirements.
The © notice: a myth to retire
Copyright in Singapore arises automatically when an original work is created. There is no copyright registry, and IPOS confirms there is nothing to register. That means the © notice has no formal legal role here: leaving it off does not lose you copyright, and adding it does not create any.
When the consumer protection law joins in
The IP statutes are not the only exposure. Under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act 2003, it is an unfair practice to do anything that might reasonably deceive or mislead a consumer, or to make a false claim (section 4). The Act’s Second Schedule lists specific unfair practices, including representing that goods have qualities or performance characteristics they do not have, that you have a sponsorship, approval or affiliation you do not have, and misrepresenting the origin, standard or method of manufacture of goods.
A false “patented technology” claim used to justify a premium price fits that list. So does a fake origin claim on food or drink, or an “officially approved” badge that implies government endorsement. The CPFTA route is civil rather than criminal, and it is enforced by consumers and by the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore. Our guide to the Trade Descriptions Act and false product claims in Singapore covers the criminal statute that sits alongside it, and our post on green claims in Singapore marketing applies the same misleading-claims test to sustainability badges.
How often are these offences prosecuted?
Rarely, as far as the public record shows. We could not find a reported Singapore prosecution under section 51 of the Trade Marks Act or sections 99 and 100 of the Patents Act. The realistic risks are different: a competitor’s lawyer’s letter pointing out that your ® is false (often as leverage in a wider dispute), a marketplace takedown after a rights-owner complaint, a consumer complaint, or a distributor relationship turning sour. A false IP claim is also an easy target in any litigation, because it is objectively provable. Treat these provisions as a compliance floor, not as a theoretical risk.
Worked example: a skincare launch
Here is how the rules play out for a typical brief. A Singapore company is launching a skincare line. The brand name was filed with IPOS four months ago. The formula uses an ingredient process licensed from a Korean lab, which has a Korean patent. The packaging was printed in Korea with ® next to the brand name and “Patented Technology” on the side.
| Element | Problem | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| ® on the brand name | Singapore application filed but not registered; packaging implies Singapore registration | Use ™ in all ads and listings now; switch to ® when IPOS shows “Registered”; ask whether the Korean ® is real and add “Reg. in Korea” where possible |
| “Patented Technology” on pack | The patent is Korean and belongs to the lab; no Singapore patent covers the product | In local copy, say what is true: “uses a process patented in Korea (Patent No. …)” if the licence allows it, or describe the benefit without the patent claim |
| Influencer script says “patent pending in Singapore” | No Singapore application exists | Remove the line from the brief before content is filmed |
| Landing page carries “© 2026” | No legal problem | Keep it; it is harmless |
| “Officially certified” badge designed by the agency | Implies an approval that does not exist; CPFTA risk | Delete the badge, or name the real certifier and certificate |
A pre-flight checklist for artwork sign-off
- List every IP word and symbol in the creative: ®, ™, ©, “registered”, “patent”, “patented”, “patent pending”, “registered design”, place names on food and drink.
- For each ®, look up the mark on IPOS’s database. Confirm the status says “Registered” and that the classes cover what you are advertising.
- For each patent claim, get the patent or application number and the country. If it is not Singapore, say so. If the application has lapsed or been refused, remove “pending”.
- For each design claim, confirm the registration is current and get its number.
- For food and drink, check every place name against the product’s real origin. For wine and spirits, drop “style”, “type” and “imitation” constructions entirely.
- Check supplier and brand-owner files, not just your own copy.
- Keep the evidence. Save the IPOS record or the patent certificate with the campaign files, dated. If you are ever challenged, due diligence is a defence to the patent and design offences, and evidence is how you show it.
What registering costs
If the check reveals a brand you sell but have not registered, the fix is usually cheaper than marketers expect. IPOS charges S$280 per class for a trade mark application where the specification is taken entirely from its pre-approved list, and S$410 per class otherwise, according to its current fees page. The SG Trade Marks Fast route adds a further fee per class at filing in exchange for faster processing. A registration lasts ten years from filing and can be renewed.
Conclusion: say only what you can prove
Every claim in this guide follows one principle: the symbol or word must have a real right behind it, in Singapore, for the product you are advertising. ™ is always available. ® waits for the IPOS certificate and stays inside its classes. “Patented” needs a granted patent, “patent pending” needs a live application, and “registered design” needs a current registration, ideally with the number shown, because the number is what protects your damages against copycats. Place names on wine and spirits belong only to products from that place.
If you want campaigns where every product claim has been checked before launch, that is part of how our performance marketing team in Singapore works, from listing copy to paid social creative. See our client case studies for the kind of results that follow. For related reading, our guides to bidding on competitor brand names in Singapore and fighting brand impersonation on social media cover the other side of trade mark marketing, and our e-commerce digital marketing guide covers selling online more broadly. For the bigger picture, start with our complete guide to performance marketing in Singapore.
Registration symbols are one kind of credential claim; certifications and awards are another. Our guide to advertising ISO certifications and award claims in Singapore covers the ISO logo rules, “certified” versus “accredited”, and how CCCS has dealt with false testing claims.
Frequently asked questions
Can I use the ® symbol while my trade mark application is pending?
No. IPOS says ® may only be used once the mark’s status shows as “Registered”. While the application is pending, use ™. Using ® on a pending mark is a false representation that the mark is registered under section 51 of the Trade Marks Act, with a maximum fine of S$10,000.
Is it illegal to use ™ in Singapore?
No. No Singapore statute regulates the ™ symbol. It simply tells people you are using the name or logo as a trade mark. You can use it on an unregistered mark at any time.
My brand is registered in the US but not in Singapore. Can I keep the ® on my listings?
Only if you make clear the registration is in the US and it genuinely covers those goods. Under section 51(2), a bare ® used in trade in Singapore is read as a claim of Singapore registration. Add a line such as “Registered trade mark in the US”, or use ™ until the mark is registered in Singapore.
When can I say “patent pending”?
Only while a patent application for the product has actually been filed and has not been refused, withdrawn or abandoned. Using “patent pending” or “patent applied for” without a live application is an offence under section 100 of the Patents Act, with a maximum of a S$10,000 fine, 12 months’ jail, or both.
Can I describe my sparkling wine as “Champagne-style”?
Not if it is not from Champagne. The Geographical Indications Act gives wine and spirit indications protection even when the true origin is stated and the name is qualified with words such as “style”, “type” or “imitation”. Describe the product in your own words, such as “traditional-method sparkling wine”.
Do I need a © notice to protect my website content?
No. Copyright arises automatically in Singapore and there is no registration system, so a © notice has no formal legal effect. It is still a useful reminder of ownership, and it is harmless to keep.
