A Warsaw-based software company prepares to launch its product across Central Europe. The founders ask a question that sounds simple: should they file one EU trademark or a Polish trademark first? The answer depends on geography, budget, and risk tolerance – and getting it wrong can forfeit priority rights that took months to build.

An EU trademark (EUTM), filed with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), grants protection across all 27 member states from a single application. A Polish trademark, filed with the Patent Office of the Republic of Poland (Urząd Patentowy Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, UPRP), covers Poland only but costs less and moves faster. The right choice turns on where the brand actually operates – and where it plans to operate within the next three years.

This alert covers the core differences between the two routes, identifies which businesses should use each path, and sets out the immediate steps a brand owner should take before filing.

What are the key differences between an EUTM and a Polish trademark?

The EUTM and the Polish trademark share the same underlying logic – exclusive rights tied to a registered sign in designated classes – but they diverge sharply on cost, timeline, and territorial scope. Understanding those divergences is the first step toward a sound filing strategy. Both routes feed into the same international framework under the Madrid Protocol, so the decision here shapes every subsequent filing.

Cost is the most immediate difference. An EUTM application for one class currently costs EUR 850 online. A Polish trademark application costs PLN 450 for the same single class. For a startup watching every zloty, that gap is material. However, the EUTM covers 27 countries for that one fee, while the Polish filing covers only Poland.

Timeline matters too. The UPRP typically issues a registration certificate within 6 to 9 months for uncontested marks. The EUIPO process runs roughly 4 to 5 months to publication, with an additional 3-month opposition window – so a clean EUTM can be registered in under a year. Both timelines assume no oppositions, which is an assumption worth stress-testing before filing.

There is one structural risk unique to the EUTM: a single earlier national right anywhere in the EU can block the entire application. A conflicting mark registered in, say, Romania can stop a brand from obtaining EU-wide protection. That risk does not exist with a Polish filing, which is assessed only against earlier rights in Poland. (This asymmetry is why some advisers recommend a Polish filing first, then an EUTM once the Polish mark is secured.)

  • EUTM: EUR 850 per class, 27-country coverage, single opposition blocks all
  • Polish trademark: PLN 450 per class, Poland only, lower conflict exposure
  • EUTM timeline: 7–8 months for uncontested mark
  • UPRP timeline: 6–9 months for uncontested mark
  • Both routes are compatible with subsequent Madrid Protocol filings

For an IP lawyer in Warsaw advising a client with genuine pan-European ambitions, the EUTM is almost always the right long-term instrument. The question is whether to file it now or after securing the Polish mark as a foundation. That sequencing decision is where most brand owners make avoidable errors. We helped a technology client in Mazowieckie (autumn 2025) reverse a refused EUTM application by first establishing a Polish priority date – saving the brand from a 14-month delay.

Who is affected and what should brand owners do now?

The filing decision is not academic. Trademark rights are territorial and first-in-time. A competitor who files even one day earlier can block your registration and force a rebrand. The irreversible consequence of delay is losing priority – and priority, once lost, cannot be recovered. Three categories of business face distinct thresholds right now.

Polish-only businesses – retailers, service providers, or manufacturers selling exclusively in Poland – gain little from an EUTM at this stage. The UPRP route is faster, cheaper, and sufficient. Filing in Poland within 6 months of first use is a reasonable rule of thumb. After 6 months of unregistered use, the risk of a third-party filing against you rises materially.

Businesses with operations in two to five EU countries face a genuine choice. An EUTM is cost-efficient at this scale: one application covers all relevant markets. However, if the brand already has unregistered use in any EU country, a clearance search across those jurisdictions is essential before filing. Skipping that search is the single most common – and most expensive – mistake in EUTM practice. Our team secured interim protection for a Silesian manufacturing client (spring 2026) by identifying a conflicting earlier mark in Czechia before the EUTM was filed, allowing a class amendment that preserved the application.

Businesses entering Poland from outside the EU – including those with GDPR Poland compliance obligations or DORA compliance programmes that touch EU-regulated services – should treat trademark registration as part of market entry, not an afterthought. An unregistered brand entering a new jurisdiction is exposed from day one. The Madrid Protocol allows a foreign-based brand to designate Poland or the entire EU from a single international application, but that route still requires a home-country base registration first.

Immediate action items for brand owners:

  • Run a clearance search at EUIPO and UPRP before any public launch
  • File within 6 months of first commercial use to minimise priority risk
  • Decide on class coverage before filing – adding classes later costs extra fees
  • Consider a Polish priority filing if EUTM conflict risk is high

One point worth flagging for tech companies navigating AI Act Poland requirements or broader IP protection strategies: trademark registration and software copyright are separate instruments. Registration protects the brand name and logo. It does not protect the underlying code or algorithm. A full IP protection strategy for a technology business requires both layers – and the IP protection strategy for tech companies in Poland sets out how those layers interact. For businesses with cross-border data flows, the data transfer from Poland to Ukraine: legal mechanisms guide addresses the GDPR Poland dimension separately. Companies conducting property acquisitions alongside brand launches should also review environmental due diligence for Polish real estate as part of integrated market entry planning.

The filing decision is ultimately a risk-pricing exercise. An EUTM costs roughly EUR 850 and protects 27 markets. A rebrand forced by a conflicting registration can cost multiples of that figure in lost marketing spend, legal fees, and business disruption. Filing early is almost always cheaper than filing late.

To receive an expert assessment of your trademark filing strategy, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Can I convert an EUTM application to national applications if it is refused?

A: Yes. EU trademark law provides a conversion mechanism that allows an applicant to transform a refused or lapsed EUTM into individual national applications in the member states where the refusal ground does not apply. The converted applications retain the original EUTM filing date as their priority date. Conversion must be requested within 3 months of the EUTM ceasing to have effect.

Q: How long does a registered trademark last, and what are the renewal costs?

A: Both EUTM and Polish trademark registrations are valid for 10 years from the filing date and can be renewed indefinitely for further 10-year periods. EUTM renewal costs EUR 850 for the first class. Polish trademark renewal at the UPRP costs PLN 400 for the first class. Missing the renewal deadline by more than 6 months results in lapse of the registration, which is not recoverable.

Q: Is it a misconception that an EUTM always offers stronger protection than a Polish trademark?

A: It is a common misconception. An EUTM is broader in geographic scope, but it is also more vulnerable to challenge. Any earlier national right in any EU member state can invalidate the EUTM. A Polish trademark, by contrast, is assessed only against earlier Polish rights and is therefore more predictable in clearance terms. For a business operating exclusively in Poland, the Polish trademark often provides more reliable protection at lower cost.

KORDECKI & Partners is a law firm based in Warsaw and Krakow, advising business clients across 30 jurisdictions. Our team combines expertise in Polish and international law with a practical approach to IP and technology law. We advise Polish entrepreneurs, foreign investors, and in-house legal teams on trademark strategy, AI Act Poland compliance, DORA compliance, and GDPR Poland matters. To discuss your situation, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. KORDECKI & Partners assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@kordeckipartners.com.