Trademark Status

Apple Daily Trademark in the UK: Legal Overview

UK Registration: Our research did not reveal any active UK trademark registration for “Apple Daily.” A search of the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) database showed no current trademarks or pending applications under that name. Likewise, we found no evidence of an EU trademark (EUTM) or international (WIPO Madrid) registration for “Apple Daily” that would extend protection to the UK. In other words, the term does not appear to be registered or protected in the UK at this time. Any past attempts to register the mark outside Hong Kong have not resulted in a lasting registration – for example, a 2014 U.S. application for “Apple Daily” (covering print and online news services) was ultimately abandoned. (This U.S. filing encountered obstacles and was never granted, suggesting potential conflicts with pre-existing marks.) Overall, “Apple Daily” is not a registered trade mark in the UK, nor is there an obvious international trademark in force that would cover the UK.

Use in Hong Kong/Taiwan: It’s important to note that Apple Daily’s trademarks did exist in its home markets. Apple Daily was a well-known newspaper brand in Hong Kong (蘋果日報) and had a Taiwanese edition. Those trademarks were held locally by the newspaper’s parent company (Next Digital/Apple Daily Ltd). However, Hong Kong and Taiwan registrations do not confer rights in the UK. No public records indicate that the company ever registered the name in Europe or the UK. In fact, when Apple Daily’s Taiwan operations were sold in 2022, the new owners explicitly avoided using the “Apple Daily” name or assets, likely due to trademark concerns. Reports noted that the new publication (rebranded as “Next Apple News”) would “not use the existing website, brand, or assets of the Apple Daily Taiwan”, to avoid overlapping with the Apple Daily trademark owned by the original company. This implies that the original Apple Daily trademarks remained with the original company (or its liquidators), and new ventures steered clear of infringing those local rights.

Ownership and Control

Original Owner: The Apple Daily brand was created and owned by Next Digital Limited (formerly Next Media), the media group founded by Jimmy Lai in Hong Kong. Within that group, subsidiaries like Apple Daily Limited and Apple Daily Printing Limited likely held the intellectual property rights. After the Hong Kong paper’s forced closure in June 2021, Next Digital went into liquidation. Hong Kong authorities froze the company’s assets (including its IP) amid national security investigations. As a result, control of the Apple Daily brand in Hong Kong is effectively in limbo – under the custody of court-appointed liquidators and constrained by government freeze orders. The Hong Kong liquidators even attempted to reach Apple Daily’s overseas assets, such as the Taiwanese branch, as part of the liquidation. (Taiwan’s government blocked the transfer of those assets, citing sovereignty and press freedom concerns.)

Current Status of the Brand: There is no active business using the “Apple Daily” name with authorization from the original owner. All official Apple Daily publications (in Hong Kong and Taiwan) have shut down. The brand’s trademarks, logos, and other IP remain property of the Next Digital estate, but are not being commercially exploited now. Notably, when Apple Daily Taiwan was wound down in 2022, 96% of its staff moved to a new outlet with a different name and “Next Apple News” launched with a new trademark and website. This underscores that no successor company inherited the rights to use “Apple Daily” – the new owners deliberately changed the branding to avoid infringement. In fact, one prospective buyer in Taiwan (businessman Kenny Wee) claimed he had rights from the Hong Kong liquidator to dispose of Apple Daily Taiwan’s assets, but that deal fell through. Ultimately, no one outside the liquidation process currently holds a valid license or assignment of the “Apple Daily” trademark rights.

Domain Name Situation: The original Apple Daily web domain (e.g. appledaily.com or .hk) also ended up outside the control of Next Digital. After the shutdown, those domains expired or were sold off. A Serbian investor, for example, acquired the Apple Daily domain and repurposed it for unrelated content (lifestyle and tech articles). This domain “takeover” happened without any intervention by the original owners, suggesting they were unable or unwilling to enforce any rights at that point. It appears the Apple Daily name is not being actively defended in the online space now. The fact that a third party can run a site at the old domain without authorization indicates the trademark and domain portfolio fell into neglect due to the company’s collapse.

Summary: In practical terms, no active entity is policing or exercising exclusive control over the “Apple Daily” name in the West. The rights are technically still held by the defunct company’s estate, but with Next Digital liquidated and its executives imprisoned or incapacitated, enforcement of those rights internationally is dormant. There is no known assignment of the trademark to any new media entity, and any theoretical rights holder (e.g. a liquidator or Jimmy Lai’s representatives) has not pursued international protection or claims. Thus, from a UK perspective, the name is not currently “owned” or controlled by anyone via a UK/EU trademark.

Legal Risk Assessment

Trademark Infringement (UK): Since no registered UK trademark for “Apple Daily” exists, using the domain appledaily.uk for a news website would not directly infringe any UK-registered mark. There is similarly no EU trademark in force that could be extended or recognized in the UK. This greatly reduces the risk of a trademark infringement lawsuit or a takedown demand in the UK. In other words, no one holds an obvious trademark monopoly on that name in the UK that could be used to stop your use of it.

Claims by Original Owners: Could the former owners (or liquidators) of Apple Daily object? In theory, they might claim unregistered goodwill or reputational rights in the name and attempt a passing off action in common law. However, such a claim would face hurdles: passing off requires proving that the name has goodwill or reputation in the UK and that the public would be misled into thinking your site is connected to the original Apple Daily. The original Apple Daily was a Hong Kong/Taiwan-focused publication; it did not operate or publish in the UK, aside from being accessible online. Any goodwill in the UK would be limited to Hong Kong diaspora or international readers, not the general public. It is unlikely a court would find substantial UK goodwill or confusion among a significant portion of UK consumers. Moreover, the original company is defunct and in no position to launch legal actions abroad. Given these factors, the risk of a passing-off claim from Apple Daily’s former owners in the UK is very low. We found no record of any such disputes or legal cases in the UK or Europe – there’s no history of “Apple Daily” being litigated as a trademark issue in the UK/EU.

Conflict with Apple Inc.: An important consideration is the presence of Apple Inc.’s trademarks. The word “Apple” is a famously strong mark owned by Apple Inc., and they have a broad portfolio covering many classes (including media and online services). While “Apple Daily” refers to a news brand unrelated to the tech giant, Apple Inc. has a history of aggressively protecting the “Apple” name. In fact, Apple Inc. took steps in the past that likely impeded the Apple Daily trademark abroad. Notably, the 2014 U.S. Apple Daily trademark application was met with a letter of protest by a third party (almost certainly Apple Inc.), and the application was ultimately refused and abandoned. This suggests that Apple Inc. viewed “Apple Daily” as conflicting with its Apple mark (perhaps because of the identical term “Apple” and potential overlap in digital publishing or news services).

For use of the name in the UK, Apple Inc. could conceivably raise objections if they believe the public might associate appledaily.uk with Apple’s products or services. For example, Apple offers a news platform (“Apple News”); an unrelated serious news site called “Apple Daily” might be argued (by Apple’s lawyers) to cause confusion or dilute their brand. However, there are also counterpoints: Apple Daily as a combined term has an established meaning (the Hong Kong newspaper) distinct from Apple Inc., and your use would clearly be as a news outlet, not selling tech gadgets. Apple Inc.’s trademarks don’t automatically give them control over every use of “Apple” in a name, especially for differing services, but they do have a record of wide-ranging enforcement. While we are not aware of any specific action by Apple Inc. against the Apple Daily newspaper historically, any new usage in the UK might come onto Apple’s radar. The risk from Apple Inc. is primarily if you attempt to register “Apple Daily” as a UK trademark – they would very likely file an opposition during the application process. Even without a registration, if your site gains prominence, Apple might send a warning letter if they perceive brand misuse. This risk is hard to quantify, but it exists given Apple’s aggressive IP strategy.

Domain Name Disputes: Using appledaily.uk also means Nominet’s dispute resolution policy (for .uk domains) comes into play. Generally, to challenge your domain, a complainant would need to have rights in a similar name and show your registration is abusive. Since “Apple Daily” isn’t trademarked in the UK by others, a challenge is unlikely. The most plausible challenger would be Apple Inc. (with “Apple” trademarks). If Apple Inc. argued that “appledaily” is confusingly similar to their “Apple” mark, they would still need to show you have no legitimate interest and registered the domain in bad faith (e.g. to target Apple Inc.). If your website is a bona fide news site unrelated to Apple Inc., it’s not a cybersquatting scenario. Apple would have a tough case, as “appledaily” clearly refers to the known news brand, not an Apple Inc. product. So, while we can’t rule out a challenge, Apple Inc. winning a domain dispute over appledaily.uk is not very likely if you operate legitimately.

Political/Defamation Risks: Aside from trademark issues, consider that reviving the Apple Daily name might draw political attention, given its prominence in Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement. This isn’t a trademark problem per se, but using that name could invite scrutiny or even hostile actions from entities that opposed the original Apple Daily. For example, Chinese state actors might attempt cyber or legal harassment if your site is seen as a continuation of Apple Daily’s legacy. While this is speculative, it’s a real-world risk of using a charged brand name. It doesn’t affect trademark enforceability in the UK, but it’s worth noting as a broader risk in using the Apple Daily name for a news outlet. Legally, however, UK law would protect your right to use the name so long as trademark and other media laws are respected.

Summary of Risks: In sum, the trademark-related risks of using “appledaily.uk” are relatively low because no one has an active UK/IP right to the name. The original trademark owners are incapacitated, and no UK/EU registrations exist. The main legal consideration is the potential friction with Apple Inc.’s well-known “Apple” mark, but that is a manageable risk if handled properly (the context is different and the term is part of an established newspaper name). There’s also a remote risk of a passing off claim if someone tried to resurrect Apple Daily and argue you misrepresented an affiliation – but given the current situation, that is highly unlikely. We found no evidence of any ongoing trademark disputes over “Apple Daily” in Europe that would complicate your use. All indications are that the name is currently unused and unenforced in this region.

Recommended Actions

1. Thorough Trademark Search: As a first step, conduct a comprehensive trademark search (or have an IP professional do one) to confirm that no new filings for “Apple Daily” have appeared in the UK, EU, or WIPO system. Our research didn’t find any, but it’s wise to double-check the official databases right before you launch. Ensure that no variations or related marks (like translations or logos resembling the Apple Daily logo) are registered in news/media classes in the UK. This will give you confidence that you’re not stepping on an existing right.

2. Consider Registering a UK Trademark: If you plan to build a serious news brand on appledaily.uk, you may want to apply to register “Apple Daily” as a UK trademark (likely in Class 41 for news reporting services, and perhaps Class 16 for newspapers, to cover both online and print). Owning a registration would strengthen your position and help prevent others from claiming the name in the UK. Be prepared for opposition, however. As noted, Apple Inc. could oppose your application on the basis of the word “Apple.” You should be ready to argue that “Apple Daily” is an established journalistic name and not related to consumer electronics. Given that the mark was used for decades in Asia, you might cite its historical context to distinguish it from Apple Inc. (For example, Apple Daily was a newspaper founded in 1995, long before Apple Inc. entered news or publishing). It’s advisable to engage a trademark attorney for the application to navigate any such challenges. If the risk of opposition from Apple Inc. seems too high, an alternative is to register a slightly modified mark (e.g. including a logo or additional words in the brand) to reduce confusion with “Apple” alone.

3. Use the Name in Good Faith (Avoid Confusion): When you launch appledaily.uk, make it clear in your branding and content that this is a new, independent news site. To avoid any initial confusion, you might include a tagline or disclaimer such as “An independent news site based in the UK” or “Not affiliated with Apple Daily Hong Kong or Apple Inc.” This helps address two points: (a) it signals that you’re not the same entity as the former Hong Kong Apple Daily (in case any readers are wondering about a connection), and (b) it clarifies you’re unrelated to Apple Inc. While not legally required, such clarity can preempt complaints by showing you’re not attempting to mislead consumers. From a trademark standpoint, consistent and distinctive branding (logo, design, etc.) that differs from Apple Inc.’s trade dress will also help insulate you from claims. Essentially, avoid using any Apple (Inc.) logos or imagery, and focus on the journalistic identity of the name. Given the legacy of the Apple Daily name, you can acknowledge that heritage (if that’s part of your brand story) but make sure it’s clear who is running the .uk site now.

4. Monitor and Defend Your Use: Keep an eye on any future trademark applications or legal notices concerning the name. If, for instance, the Hong Kong liquidators or another party were to suddenly register “Apple Daily” in the UK or EU, you’d want to know and potentially oppose them (though this scenario is unlikely). Similarly, be prepared to respond to any cease-and-desist letters. If Apple Inc. or others contact you, don’t ignore it – consult a lawyer and respond formally, explaining your legitimate use. Given the analysis above, you have strong arguments that your use is lawful. Document your site’s purpose and audience; if you can show that “Apple Daily” is understood by your readers as a news publication name, not related to Apple Inc., that will help rebut any claimed confusion. Also note that Apple Daily’s history is well-known in certain circles, so leveraging that context (e.g. archival references) can show it’s a pre-existing term in journalism, not something chosen to trade off Apple’s goodwill.

5. Alternative Naming (if Risk Tolerance is Low): If you wish to eliminate trademark risk entirely, you might consider using a modified name for the site. For example, some diaspora journalists have launched sites under new names (to avoid legal entanglements with the old Apple Daily IP). If the Apple Daily name is not crucial to your brand identity, adopting a different but related name (perhaps an homage that doesn’t exactly use the trademark) could be an option. This would moot any trademark issues with Apple Inc. or the old owners. However, if the name is important for its recognition and legacy, then following the above steps should manage the risks reasonably.

6. Obtain Legal Advice: Given that you intend to run a “serious news website,” it would be prudent to consult with a UK intellectual property lawyer before launch. They can provide a formal clearance opinion on the name “appledaily.uk” and advise on the best strategy to secure your brand. They may also assist in drafting terms of use and disclaimers that further protect you. Additionally, since the content may be politically sensitive, a media law expert can ensure you have measures in place for any libel or press-law issues (separate from trademark law).

In conclusion, using the domain appledaily.uk is feasible from a trademark perspective, because the term isn’t currently protected in the UK. The biggest legal considerations are the residual claims of the old Apple Daily (which are dormant) and the possible objections of Apple Inc. With due diligence and proactive measures – such as registering your own mark and clearly distinguishing your brand – you can mitigate these risks. No existing trademark appears to block your use of “Apple Daily” in the UK, and there is no record of enforceable rights here that would restrain you. As long as you proceed carefully and in good faith, the name can be used for your news website with a manageable risk profile.

Sources: