The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of 19 June 2025 in the case concerning pharmacy advertising (C-200/24) brought an end to the absolute ban and at the same time opened a new discussion on how the law should be applied during the transitional period, i.e. until the Pharmaceutical Law is amended. On the one hand, the pharmaceutical inspection authorities and the autonomous pharmacy association continue to rely on Article 94a of the Pharmaceutical Law; on the other, administrative courts have consistently overturned further decisions, invoking the primacy of EU law. As a result, the market has found itself in a state of suspension—pharmacies are trying to operate under new rules, authorities are imposing fines, and courts are annulling them. It is precisely this practical “dual-track” situation that currently defines the core of the dispute over the future of pharmacy advertising in Poland.

The CJEU judgment did not automatically change the wording of article 94a of the Pharmaceutical Law, and for this reason pharmaceutical inspectorates continue to adhere to the existing approach, under which the advertising ban is interpreted as absolute. Consequently, administrative proceedings are still being conducted and fines imposed for activities deemed to constitute pharmacy advertising, even if they amount merely to neutral information about the availability of services or opening hours.

Administrative courts are only beginning to address the new reality. In the first rulings, references were made to the need to incorporate the CJEU judgment into rulings, and the direction is clear—national courts, applying the principle of the primacy of EU law, will have to overturn decisions of the pharmaceutical inspectorate issued solely on the basis of the literal ban set out in Article 94a of the Pharmaceutical Law. An absolute ban on pharmacy advertising can no longer be reconciled with the requirements of European law, and the practice of the authorities must be adjusted accordingly.

The CJEU judgment immediately sparked a discussion within the pharmacy community. The strongest reaction came from the sector’s autonomous association. In a statement of 27 June 2025, the Supreme Pharmaceutical Chamber (Naczelna Izba Aptekarska, NIA) said that despite the CJEU judgment, Polish law still contains provisions protecting pharmacists and patients against sales pressure from pharmacy owners.

From the patients’ perspective, lifting the absolute advertising ban may mean a real improvement in access to information about pharmaceutical services. Pharmacies will be able to inform patients about vaccinations, preventive programs, or care for chronically ill patients. Until now, release of such information has been classified as prohibited advertising. The bill is now undergoing public consultation. While there will no longer be an absolute ban on advertising, advertising will still be strictly regulated. Lawmakers have proposed a broad definition of advertising, prohibited the offering of any kind of benefit, and introduced detailed rules restricting content and form, and interim provisions to close proceedings that are initiated but in which no final decision has been issued as at the date the new legislation takes effect.  In practice, the bill may lead to proper organization of the rules on the information that pharmacies communicate to patients (regarding for example pharmaceutical services). At the same time, there is a shift of responsibility for interpretation of terms such as the goal of increasing sales or any kind of benefit. For this sector, this is a time to take on an active role in the consultations while at the same time making preparations to ensure customer information compliance with the new regime.

As of 1 December 2025, a new system for the protection of geographical indications for craft and industrial products came into force across the European Union. Until now, EU-wide protection covered only foodstuffs, wine, and spirits. The new EU system of geographical indication protection now also applies to craft and industrial products whose quality, reputation, or other characteristics are attributable to their geographical origin.

Under the new system, craft products are goods produced entirely by hand or using hand tools, digital tools, or mechanical means, provided that manual input constitutes an essential component of the finished product. Industrial products, in turn, are those manufactured in a standardized manner, including through mass production and the use of machinery. In practice, the new system opens the way to protecting product categories including  glass and crystal, ceramic products, clothing, other textile products, jewelry, furniture, tools, cutlery, metal goods, watches/clocks, musical instruments, and paper/cardboard.

Geographical indications are word marks that indicate that a given product originates from a specific place and is produced using local skills and traditions. A product may enjoy protection as a geographical indication if it:
(i) originates from a specific area, country, or region;
(ii) has a quality, reputation, or characteristic linked to that area, country, or region, such as the specificity of raw materials, unique production technology, or a reputation built over generations;
(iii) is produced at least partially in that area, country, or region.

Geographical indications for craft and industrial products are subject to registration at the European Union level, in accordance with EU Regulation 2023/2411. An application to register a geographical indication is assessed in two stages: at the national level (before the Polish Patent Office) and at the EU level (before the EUIPO). Upon registration, a product that  is protected as a geographical indication enjoys unlimited legal protection throughout the entire EU, regardless of the form in which it is used. In addition, the producer will be able to use a special visual geographical indication symbol and place it on the product or in marketing communications.

Registration of a geographical indication is an important development tool not only for producers, but also for countries and regions. It also benefits consumers by protecting them against counterfeit goods and unfair competition.

In November 2025, after more than a year and a half of government work, a bill amending the Act on the National Cybersecurity System was submitted to the Sejm—intended to implement the EU NIS 2 Directive. Although more than a year has passed since the deadline for implementing the NIS 2 Directive, the required legislation has still not been adopted in Poland.

While the bill relatively faithfully reflects the content and principles provided for in the NIS 2 Directive, the Polish legislator diverges somewhat from the directive, for example by including new, autonomous solutions). Below we describe the five most important differences:

1. Greater scope of entities affected
   The bill extends the scope of entities subject to the legislation, for instance by classifying small, managed cybersecurity service providers as essential entities, and by including advisory services under this term. The bill also brings entities providing domain name registration services into the digital infrastructure sector (regulated in the NIS 2 Directive in a partially separate manner) and defines particular categories of entities by reference to Polish legislation. This may at times give rise to discrepancies between the Polish and EU-level understanding of certain concepts.
2. Introduction of a registration obligation
   The amendment would require essential and important entities to submit an application for entry in the relevant register. Essential and important entities will have three months to submit the application, and failure to do so may result in the entity concerned being fined.
3. Extension of CSIRT powers
   The bill grants the competent CSIRTs the power to examine ICT products, services, and processes in order to identify vulnerabilities. For this purpose, CSIRTs will be entitled to use methods aimed for instance at reconstructing the source code of software, duplicating program code, or translating its form. At the same time, CSIRTs will not be bound by contractual provisions (in particular license agreements) relating to the examined ICT products, services, or processes, and conducting such examinations will not require the consent of the licensor or the holder of the ICT product, service, or process.
4. Introduction of the concept of a high-risk supplier
   The bill introduces the possibility of designating a supplier of hardware or software as a high-risk supplier if it poses a threat to  fundamental national security interests. As a consequence, essential entities, important entities, and entities subject to the DORA Regulation will not be allowed to put into use ICT products, services, or processes originating from such suppliers, and those already in use will have to be withdrawn.
5. Introduction of an administrative fine of up to PLN 100 million
   The proposal provides for the possibility of fining an essential or important entity up to PLN 100 million for the following:
   a) causing a direct and serious cyber threat to national defense, national security, public safety and order, or human life and health;
   b) causing a risk of significant property damage or serious disruption to the provision of services.

The bill will now undergo readings in both chambers of parliament, and may still be amended. Importantly, representatives of all major parliamentary groupings (including opposition parties) emphasize the importance and necessity of adopting this legislation. As a result, it has a strong chance of becoming generally applicable law in the near future.

Precise IP strategy is half the battle. It will help avoid problems and unnecessary costs. However, action must be taken at the right time and in the right place.

Trade marks – when?

As soon as possible, but don’t forget about trade mark searches and copyrights.

In most jurisdictions, the “first-to-file” principle applies, meaning whoever files first has priority.

This doesn’t necessarily mean, though, filing a trade mark application should be your very first step!

Before filing, before introducing a product or service to the market, and even earlier – before taking any preparatory steps towards entering the market (such as producing packaging or creating visualisations for your services on a website) – it is always advisable to conduct a registrability search.

Trademark clearance and protection

Trade mark registrability search makes it possible to assess a likelihood of obtaining registration and to identify the most significant obstacles. Such a search may reveal that the intended market name is already taken by another business, and entering the market under that name could lead to infringement, along with all associated consequences (including a court injunction prohibiting use of the mark, surrender of unjustified profits, or compensation for damage).

At this stage, it is equally important to ensure that, in case of figurative or word-figurative marks, copyright to the graphic design is properly secured. Otherwise, the designer could successfully seek invalidation of the trade mark right.

Thus, while it is generally best to protect a trade mark as early as possible, the application should be preceded by at least a registrability search and securing copyright in the graphic design of the mark.

To further minimise the risks associated with market entry, a “freedom-to-operate” analysis can also be carried out. This assessment examines the risk of infringing third-party rights not only by reviewing trade marks recorded in official IP registers, but also by considering unregistered signs used on the market and signs that may enjoy reputation.

Designs – when?

As soon as possible, but take into account limited duration of protection and rights of creators.

Industrial designs operate under somewhat different rules, as their protection depends, among other things, on the requirement of “novelty”. In this case, it is generally safer to file an application first and only then enter the market. There are, however, certain exceptions.

Design rights are granted only when the design is new, meaning it has not been made available to the public, for example by being placed on the market before the priority date, which is usually the filing date.

This doesn’t mean, however, that a design application must always be filed before market entry!

“Grace period” – safe disclosure of a design

In many jurisdictions (including Poland), a 12-month “grace period” is available, allowing the design to be disclosed before filing. This means you can introduce the product to the market, assess whether further investment is worthwhile, and then file for protection within 12 months of the first disclosure.

Keep in mind the grace period applies only to disclosures made by the designer, their legal successor, or a third party with the rights holder’s consent, or where the disclosure results from an abuse committed against the designer or their legal successor!

Protection of industrial designs – key principles

As with trade marks, before entering the market and filing a design application, it is necessary to secure copyright along with the right to obtain a design, which by default belongs to the designer.

Registrability searches for designs are advisable, but most IP offices do not examine substantive prerequisites; they grant protection once the formal requirements of the application are met. Compliance with substantive criteria such as “novelty” and “individual character” is usually assessed in invalidation proceedings.

Unlike trade mark rights – which may be renewed indefinitely for successive 10-year periods – design protection lasts for a maximum of 25 years and must be renewed every 5 years. This limited duration of protection should be taken into account when shaping a business strategy.

Inventions and utility designs – when?

As early as possible, but timing depends on R&D, patent searches, securing creators rights, and the limited duration of protection.

Protection of inventions and utility designs for technical solutions is usually preceded by time-consuming research and development. These projects typically require significant financial investment and coordinated action by several actors, including inventors, investors, and entities responsible for commercialising the technical solution.

As with designs, granting protection for inventions and utility designs depends, among other things, on the prerequisite of “novelty”. This means that the first public disclosure (for example, placing the product on the market) should occur only after filing for protection.

On the other hand, unlike designs, there is no 12-month grace period. The only exception is disclosure within six months before the filing date, but only if it was the result of an evident abuse against the applicant or their legal predecessor.

“Freedom-to-operate” analyses

As with trade marks, it is crucial to conduct a patentability search before filing. Given the substantial financial investment that typically accompanies R&D and the commercialisation of technical solutions, applicants often choose to carry out additional “freedom-to-operate” analyses to evaluate the risk of infringing third-party rights. In some cases, investors require such analyses to ensure smooth commercialisation of the invention.

Timing of filing

Before filing, the rights of the inventors must be settled. These rights may be transferred to another entity in accordance with the arrangements made between the parties involved in the development and commercialisation.

The filing date should be chosen with the limited duration of protection in mind: 20 years for patents and 10 years for utility designs rights (no possibility of extension above these periods), as well as considering the time needed for obtaining a patent – typically 3 to 5 years!

On the one hand, the timing of the application should depend on prior searches and securing the applicant’s rights to the invention; on the other, the technical solution should only be placed on the market after filing for protection. Coordinating and properly planning these actions usually requires significantly more organisational effort than in the case of other IP rights.

Where? It depends 🙂

The territorial scope of protection depends primarily on the adopted business strategy.

A natural starting point is the markets where goods or services are intended to be offered, but it is worthwhile to consider markets planned for future expansion as well.

One should bear in mind that IP rights are, in principle, territorial. This means that obtaining protection in several or a dozen countries generally requires separate applications in each of them.

There are, however, exceptional mechanisms allowing acquisition of a regional right through a single application. Examples include EU trade marks and designs, which have a unitary effect across the entire European Union.

Alternatively, it is possible to use international applications filed through WIPO, designating multiple territories within one filing. Unlike EU trade marks and designs, however, these procedures result in a bundle of national rights, rather than a single unified right.

For patents, a unitary patent has been available for over two years now, functioning in a manner similar to unitary EU trade marks. However, only 18 EU Member States have joined the unified patent system to date. The remaining states (including Poland) continue to use the traditional European patent system, which also results in a bundle of national rights.

TKP once again ranked No. 1 in Poland!

We are proud to announce that for the third consecutive year, our team has been recognised as the top FinTech legal practice in Poland in the Chambers FinTech Legal in Poland 2026 ranking (Band 1).

In the individual rankings, prof. UEK Jan Byrski, PhD hab. has once again been recognised as Top Ranked (Band 1), and Michał Synowiec, PhD has advanced this year, earning the ”Up and Coming” distinction.

We would like to thank our Clients for their trust and continued cooperation! Congratulations to the entire team and to all individuals recognised in this year’s ranking!

We are delighted to share that Traple Konarski Podrecki & Partners has been selected as a finalist for the MLI Award for Law Firm of the Year.

This distinction is awarded to firms that stand out for their expertise and professionalism in legal practice.

This is yet another important achievement for our MCE team.

Congratulations to the entire team for your continuous dedication and outstanding work, which enables us to reach such successes together!

Michał Synowiec (a member of the Fintech team) has been named one of 35 nominees in the 14th edition of the Rising Stars – Lawyers of Tomorrow 2025 competition, organized by Wolters Kluwer Polska under the media patronage of Prawo.pl.

This prestigious recognition is awarded to lawyers who stand out for their innovation, interdisciplinary approach, collaboration with business, use of new technologies, and pro bono engagement.

We are proud that a representative of TKP is among this year’s nominees! Michał, congratulations and best of luck in the final this November!

More information, along with the full list of nominees, is available at the link.

Reputed trademarks have a strong attractive power thanks to their recognition, guarantee of quality or other features perceived as unique by consumers. They can convey attractiveness, prestige, lifestyle, and so on.
However, their appeal is so strong that it often reaches beyond the circle of honest consumers to reach dangerously into the circle of potential infringers.

In the latest IP Insights, Krzysztof Wasilewski discusses the three most common forms of infringement related to the exploitation of another’s reputation:

• Dilution,
• Tarnishment
• Free-riding.

We encourage you to read!

Most of the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 (the “Data Act”) apply from 12 September 2025. The Data Act is designed to unlock business opportunities by ensuring fair access to and use of data generated by connected products and related services, enabling companies to develop new services, improve competitiveness, and create value from data-driven innovation.

Who is affected?

• Manufacturers and suppliers of connected products and related services
• Data holders (e.g. producers, service providers)
• Users of connected products and related services
• Providers of data processing services (cloud providers)
• Public authorities (in cases of exceptional need)

Key challenges for business

• Implementing procedures for data sharing with users and third parties
• Protecting trade secrets and confidential information
• Adapting contractual frameworks (B2B, B2C, cloud services)
• Managing obligations towards public authorities (B2G access)

How can we assist you?

• Contracts’ audit
• Mapping obligations
• Updating & drafting agreements
• Implementing data-sharing & portability processes
• Designing policies & procedures
• Advising on FRAND terms
• Training & workshops
• Dispute & proceedings support

We encourage you to contact our experts: Xawery Konarski, Anna Jelińska-Sabatowska, Piotr Nepelski, and Arkadiusz Baran.

In the latest 9th Edition of The Legal 500: TMT Comparative Guide, Xawery Konarski outlines the key challenges and opportunities for Poland’s technology, media, and telecommunications industries.

In the “Legal Landscapes: Poland – TMT” section of the guide, our expert covers, among others:

• the current regulatory landscape for the TMT sector in Poland and its development trends,
• three key recommendations for companies in the technology, media, and telecommunications sectors,
• the main threats and opportunities over the next 12 months,
• measures that help maintain a high level of client satisfaction,
• technologies currently shaping TMT law in Poland and how businesses can benefit from them.

We invite you to read the full article.

Traple Konarski Podrecki & Partners has once again been recognized in the IP STARS (Managing IP’s rankings publication) 2025 – in the category of Copyright & Related Rights (Tier 2)!

This marks another year in which our work and commitment to intellectual property law have been acknowledged internationally. Thank you for your trust!