ARIPO vs. OAPI: Trademark Fee Comparison

Protecting your brand in Africa? Here’s the key difference: ARIPO lets you pick specific countries for trademark protection, while OAPI covers all its member states automatically. Understanding their fee structures can save your business time and money.

Key Takeaways:

ARIPO: Pay per country and class. Costs grow with more countries and classes. Filing starts at $680, with additional fees for extra classes and states.
OAPI: One fee covers all 17 member states. Filing is simpler, with no registration fees.

Quick Comparison:

Aspect	ARIPO	OAPI
Coverage	Select specific countries	All 17 member states automatically
Base Filing Fee	Starts at $680	Approx. $905
Registration Fees	Yes, per country and class	None
Examination Type	Substantive review	Formal compliance only

Which to choose?

ARIPO: Best for targeted protection in English-speaking countries.
OAPI: Ideal for broad, cost-effective coverage in French-speaking Africa.

Your decision depends on your target markets and budget. Keep reading for a detailed breakdown of fees and strategies.

Overview of Trademark Registration in ARIPO & OAPI

ARIPO and OAPI Trademark Systems Overview

ARIPO and OAPI are regional trademark systems designed to simplify brand protection across multiple African countries. While both aim to streamline the registration process, they differ in terms of operation and coverage. Here’s a closer look at how each system works.

"These systems streamline trademark registration across multiple African countries, offering a single application process to cover African member states."

Alicia van der Walt and Tshireletso Tlholoe, Adams & Adams

The main difference between the two lies in how they handle registrations: ARIPO allows you to choose specific countries for protection, resulting in individual national registrations, whereas OAPI offers a single registration that automatically applies to all its member states. This distinction impacts costs and the extent of legal protection.

What is ARIPO?

The African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) caters primarily to English-speaking and Portuguese-speaking African countries. Operating under the Banjul Protocol, ARIPO includes 22 member states, though only 13 participate in its trademark system.

With ARIPO, you can select specific member states for trademark protection. This flexibility means you only pay for the countries where you need coverage, rather than being required to cover all member states.

"A registration through ARIPO does not equate to a regional registration but rather produces individual national registrations in the designated member states."

Alicia van der Walt and Tshireletso Tlholoe, Adams & Adams

However, ARIPO’s effectiveness can vary. Some member states have yet to update their national laws to fully recognize ARIPO registrations, which might lead to enforcement challenges. Additionally, ARIPO conducts a substantive examination of applications, ensuring a thorough review but potentially extending processing times.

ARIPO member states include:

Botswana, Cape Verde, eSwatini, Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, São Tomé and Príncipe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

What is OAPI?

OAPI takes a different approach. The Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle (OAPI) serves 17 predominantly French-speaking African countries and operates under the Bangui Agreement . Unlike ARIPO, OAPI enforces a unified registration system, meaning any trademark filed through OAPI is automatically valid in all member states.

This all-inclusive model is particularly useful if you require broad coverage across French-speaking Africa, as there’s no option to select specific countries.

"The resultant regional registration is the only way to obtain statutory trademark protection in these countries. It operates smoothly and is a very effective system."

Alicia van der Walt and Tshireletso Tlholoe, Adams & Adams

OAPI member states have abandoned their individual trademark laws, making OAPI registration the sole method of obtaining statutory protection. This creates a unified legal framework, which many find more predictable compared to ARIPO’s country-specific approach.

OAPI only examines applications for formal compliance, rather than conducting a substantive review. While this speeds up the process, it may delay the identification of potential conflicts.

OAPI member states include:

Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, and Togo.

Feature	ARIPO	OAPI
Primary Language	English/Portuguese-speaking Africa	French-speaking Africa
Member States	22 (13 for trademarks)	17
Coverage Selection	Selective Coverage	Universal Coverage
Examination Type	Substantive examination	Formal compliance only
Legal Framework	Varies by national laws	Unified legal framework

These differences set the stage for comparing their fee structures and determining which system best suits your needs.

ARIPO Trademark Fees

ARIPO uses a modular fee system where costs increase based on the number of trademark classes and member states you choose for protection. This structure plays a key role in planning your trademark budget.

Filing Fees

The starting point for filing an ARIPO trademark application is $680. This base fee covers one class of goods or services in a single designated member state. ARIPO allows multi-class applications, which means you can include multiple categories of goods or services under a single filing. It adheres to the International Classification system’s 45 classes, although Malawi follows a 34-class system.

If you opt for online filing, you can save 20% on fees, making it a more budget-friendly option.

Let’s break down how adding more classes or states affects your total costs.

Additional Fees Per Class and State

On top of the base filing fee, ARIPO charges extra for broader coverage. Each additional member state adds $185 to your total, and for each extra class within a state, you’ll pay $100 per state per class.

For example, if your trademark covers two classes in three states, here’s how the costs would look:

Base fee for one state: $680
Two additional states: $370 (2 × $185)
Additional classes: $300 (2 classes × $100 per class × 3 states)

This brings your total filing cost to $1,350.

Registration Costs

Once ARIPO approves your trademark, separate registration fees apply. These include $70 in professional fees and $100 in government fees per class per designated state. If additional classes are involved, the cost per class per state adds $50 in professional fees and $50 in government fees.

Here’s an example: For a trademark covering two classes in three states, the registration costs would be calculated as follows:

First class per state: $170 ($70 + $100)
Additional class per state: $100 ($50 + $50)

In total, the registration fees would amount to:

($170 × 3 states) + ($100 × 3 states) = $510 + $300 = $810

This phased structure – separating filing and registration fees – allows for staggered payments but requires careful financial planning. ARIPO’s approach differs from OAPI’s fee system, which we’ll explore next.

OAPI Trademark Fees

OAPI takes a straightforward approach to trademark fees with its unitary system, which stands in contrast to ARIPO’s designation-based model. Through the Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle, a single trademark application automatically extends protection across 17 member states. This unified process simplifies cost calculations and eliminates the hassle of managing multiple designations. Let’s dive into the fee structure.

Base Filing Fees

OAPI applies a fixed filing fee that covers all 17 member states. Unlike ARIPO, where costs increase with each additional designated country, OAPI offers a single, upfront fee that grants regional protection from the outset. Even priority claiming fees are set at a fixed rate. This system provides clarity and predictable costs, making it easier for applicants to plan their budgets.

No Registration Fees

Another benefit of OAPI’s approach is the absence of additional registration fees following the initial filing. Unlike ARIPO’s two-step payment process, there are no surprise charges later on. However, renewal fees are required to maintain protection. Trademarks registered under OAPI are valid for 10 years from the filing date and can be renewed indefinitely in 10-year increments. To renew, you must show that the mark is in use or licensed. This streamlined system is especially appealing for startups looking for broad, cost-effective trademark coverage.

sbb-itb-dd089af

ARIPO vs. OAPI Fee Comparison

This section takes a closer look at how ARIPO and OAPI fee structures impact startups, focusing on the practical cost differences. While ARIPO employs a designation-based fee model, OAPI uses a single unified fee. The table below highlights the key differences for a clearer understanding.

Fee Comparison Table

Aspect	ARIPO	OAPI
Coverage	10 signatory states (designation-based)	17 member states (automatic)
Base Filing Fee	$100 government fee + $400 professional fee	Single fee covers all states
Per Class (First)	$50 government + $100 professional per state	Fixed rate regardless of states
Additional Class Fee	$10 government + $40 professional per state	Lower incremental costs
Registration Fees	$100 government + $70 professional per state	No registration fees
Total Cost Example	Varies significantly by designations	Predictable, single payment

The table underscores how ARIPO’s costs increase with additional country designations. For instance, a three-class trademark application across three ARIPO states can cost around $7,850 from filing to registration. In contrast, OAPI’s filing fee of approximately $905 covers all 17 member states. ARIPO’s fee structure adds up quickly – each additional class per state incurs $10 in government fees and $40 in professional fees during filing, plus $50 each in government and professional fees for registration.

Startup Considerations

Choosing between ARIPO and OAPI depends on your target markets and growth strategy. OAPI provides broad, automatic coverage across French-speaking West and Central Africa, while ARIPO offers the flexibility to select specific English-speaking markets.

Trademark enforcement is another critical factor. ARIPO’s enforcement challenges have raised concerns among legal experts:

"As a trade mark litigator, we would advise people to think very carefully before they choose to protect their trade marks by the ARIPO route. We would always recommend, for trade mark purposes, that they use the national filing route rather."

On the other hand, OAPI’s system is considered more reliable, despite slower processing times:

"The position for trade marks broadly speaking in OAPI is pretty good. The system works very well and the OAPI office is well organised. It deals with matters very methodically, albeit in a bit of a slow way."

For startups planning to enter multiple African markets within a few years, OAPI’s extensive coverage and predictable fees might be the better option. However, if a phased approach aligns with your business strategy, ARIPO’s flexibility could be more suitable, even with its enforcement concerns.

Conclusion

Deciding between ARIPO and OAPI trademark systems boils down to your target markets and budget priorities. OAPI is a strong option for startups aiming for broad coverage in French-speaking West and Central Africa. With a single fee covering all 17 member states, its straightforward cost structure makes financial planning easier.

On the other hand, ARIPO offers flexibility with its selective model, allowing you to focus on specific countries. However, costs can add up quickly as you expand coverage. For instance, targeting seven key ARIPO countries – Kenya, Ghana, Tanzania, Uganda, Sudan, Zimbabwe, and Zambia – captures 81% of ARIPO’s total GDP and 75% of its population.

Beyond costs, your market focus is critical. If you’re targeting English-speaking countries in Eastern or Southern Africa, ARIPO’s selective approach lets you concentrate resources where they matter most. Conversely, OAPI’s unified system is ideal for Francophone markets, offering consistent protection and enforcement across all member states. Essentially, ARIPO works well for English-speaking markets, while OAPI excels in Francophone regions.

A smart strategy might combine both systems. Use OAPI for French-speaking areas, ARIPO for key English-speaking markets, and direct national filings in important non-member countries like Nigeria, South Africa, and Egypt. This approach balances cost and coverage, aligning with your expansion goals and market priorities.

Finally, keep in mind that registration fees are just the starting point. Renewal costs, enforcement actions, and the overall value of protecting your brand should all factor into your decision-making process.

FAQs

What are the key differences in enforcement and reliability between ARIPO and OAPI for trademark protection?

ARIPO vs. OAPI: Trademark Enforcement

When it comes to enforcing trademarks, ARIPO and OAPI take very different approaches, each with its own set of challenges and advantages.

ARIPO operates through a decentralized system, which means enforcement relies heavily on the legal frameworks of its individual member countries. This setup can lead to inconsistencies, as the rules and practices vary from one jurisdiction to another. As a result, navigating trademark enforcement under ARIPO can be more complicated.

On the other hand, OAPI has a unified legal system. Once a trademark is registered, it’s automatically protected across all member states. This streamlined approach often makes enforcement simpler and more predictable. That said, even with OAPI’s centralized framework, local laws and practices can still influence how effectively trademarks are protected.

For businesses looking for a more consistent and straightforward system, OAPI’s centralized structure might be a better fit compared to ARIPO’s country-specific enforcement model.

What are the cost differences for startups registering trademarks with ARIPO vs. OAPI?

When weighing the options between ARIPO and OAPI for trademark registration, startups need to take a close look at the costs involved.

For ARIPO, fees typically range from $600 to $820, depending on the number of classes and the specific filings required. However, if there are excess claims, you might face additional charges of up to $200 per claim.

On the other hand, OAPI registrations come with a steeper price tag. Fees start at around $1,500 to $2,630 for up to three classes, with extra costs for any additional classes. Despite the higher upfront expense, OAPI provides broader regional coverage, which can be a significant advantage for businesses aiming to operate in multiple countries.

In short, ARIPO is often the more affordable option for startups with a narrower focus, while OAPI is ideal for those looking to secure protection across a wider range of member states.

Can a business use both ARIPO and OAPI systems to protect trademarks across Africa, and how does this work?

Businesses have the option to use both ARIPO and OAPI systems to achieve broader trademark protection across Africa. ARIPO generally serves English-speaking countries, while OAPI caters to Francophone regions. By leveraging both systems, companies can secure legal protection and establish a presence across diverse linguistic and regional markets.

That said, this approach often comes with increased expenses and additional administrative tasks since trademarks need to be registered separately in each system. Even with these hurdles, combining ARIPO and OAPI can be an effective strategy for businesses looking to expand across multiple African markets.