A company that wants to expand into new regions, sectors, lines or brands should insist that a co-existence agreement be concluded instead of an approval agreement. This allows the company to address the potential risks they are likely to become visible in the future and pave the way for more favourable growth. An approval agreement merely authorizes the current use, without worrying about the inevitable development of trademarks. An agreement on the coexistence of trademarks should include the following: an agreement on the coexistence of trademarks should clearly include: all parties to the agreement, the indicated trademarks or logos that must coexist, an agreement on the domain names used by each party, a list of areas and geographical areas in which coexistence is permitted and prohibited, as well as all relevant plans for the expansion of the company. In addition, the co-existence agreement should include the start and end date of the agreement, a clause relating to the jurisdiction of the agreement and a dispute settlement clause. A trademark co-existence agreement is an agreement between two parties to use a similar trademark for marketing purposes without interfering with the other party`s businesses. Such agreements are often concluded because the parties require only the regional use of their trademarks and, therefore, the use of a trademark by other companies will not harm their activities. Co-existence agreements may also include designs, copyrights and even patents. [Citation required] Problems begin when this distinguishing function no longer works, because the companies for which the trademarks were originally used begin to overlap.

Thus, brands that once happily co-exist, suddenly find themselves in conflict. This is particularly frustrating if both companies use their identical brands in good faith – in other words, where they both have a track record of the actual use of their respective brands, but are starting to turn to each other`s territories because of business expansion. In some cases, if two companies know that they are using similar or identical brands, they may opt for a formal co-existence agreement to prevent the future use of the two brands from overlapping to the point of making them undesirable or hurtful. This article describes the situations in which coexistence can occur and introduces a number of points to be taken into account when considering a co-existence agreement. A trademark agreement is usually a simple contract by which a party agrees to authorize the use and/or registration of a trademark that overlaps with another party. The parties also state that their brands are not confusing to consumers. Often, this type of agreement is used when a company has received or is anticipating a refusal to register by the USPTO (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office).

Brand co-existence describes a situation in which two different companies use a similar or identical brand to market one product or service without necessarily interfering with the activities of the other. This is not unusual. Brands are often used by small businesses in a limited geographic area or with a regional clientele. Almost all French cities with a train station, for example, have their own buffet restaurant at the station.