{
  "id": 11434367,
  "title": "British fashion brand NEXT loses bid to invalidate Singapore firm NEXTEVO’s trademarks",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/10/02/british-fashion-brand-next-loses-bid-to-invalidate-singapore-firm",
  "topic": "business",
  "section": "Business",
  "published": "2026-10-02T11:45:00.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Straits Times Business",
    "slug": "straits-times-business",
    "url": "https://www.straitstimes.com/business/british-fashion-brand-next-loses-bid-to-invalidate-singapore-firm-nextevos-trademarks"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "Singapore's Intellectual Property Office (IPOS) has ruled that British fashion brand NEXT failed in its attempt to invalidate the trademarks of Singapore-based sustainability company NEXTEVO. The decision came after a dispute over the similarity of the two company names. IPOS found that the NEXTEVO trademarks were not visually, audibly or conceptually similar to NEXT's existing registered marks. NEXT had argued that the common \"NEXT\" element in both names made them alike and that the \"EVO\" portion of NEXTEVO could be interpreted as an abbreviation for \"evolution.\" However, the registrar disagreed, stating that the primary question was whether the underlying concepts of NEXTEVO and NEXT were similar. She dismissed the idea of \"evo\" being an accepted abbreviation of \"evolution\" as a \"red herring,\" noting that NEXTEVO is an invented word unfamiliar to the public. The two companies operate in different segments of the fashion and textile industries, with NEXT being a British retailer founded in 1864 and NEXTEVO transforming agricultural waste into eco-friendly materials. Despite NEXTEVO's claim that its name combined \"NEXT\" and \"evolution,\" the registrar found that trademarks should be viewed as wholes and that NEXT's arguments of bad faith and passing off were not supported. Consequently, both NEXTEVO trademarks remain registered, and NEXT was ordered to pay $14,450 in costs.",
  "summary": "NEXT had argued, among other things, that the common “NEXT” element made the marks similar.",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}