In Argentina, registering an industrial model or design protects the new ornamental appearance of an industrial or handicraft product: its shape or the appearance applied to it. Registration provides a way to prevent unauthorised commercial reproduction or imitation and can be relevant to furniture, packaging, clothing, lighting and many other products. Applications are filed with INPI, Argentina’s National Institute of Industrial Property, and protection lasts five years, renewable up to a maximum of fifteen. Enforcement requires a valid registration, evidence of ownership and proof of which protected features the disputed product reproduces.

What is an industrial design, and what is it used for?

A chair may serve the same purpose as hundreds of others yet have a distinctive silhouette. A container may attract attention through its curves; a fabric, through its pattern. That appearance may account for an important part of a product’s commercial value, even if it does not improve how the product works.

Decree-Law 6673/63, as currently amended, establishes Argentina’s legal framework. Registration allows the owner to exploit and transfer the design and take action against unauthorised exploitation. It can also support a manufacturing licence: the agreement should specify who may use the design, on what terms, for how long and subject to which controls.

Protection is not reserved for large manufacturers. It may matter to a handicraft business, a design studio or an SME. Nor does it protect an abstract idea, such as “making folding furniture”: the application concerns a specific appearance, identified through images.

Industrial models and industrial designs: what can be registered?

INPI distinguishes between industrial models, which concern three-dimensional aspects, and industrial designs, which concern two-dimensional aspects. Both fall within the same Argentine framework. In everyday usage, “industrial design” often refers to both.

Three-dimensional shapes: for example, the ornamental configuration of a lamp, chair, container or piece of jewellery. Two-dimensional aspects: for example, a drawing or ornamentation applied to fabric or to a product’s surface. These are examples to assess; whether a particular design can be registered depends on the proposal and the existing designs.

The manufacturing technique does not determine protection. A 3D-printed item can have a registrable appearance, just like one made using other methods. Our article on protecting items created through 3D printing (in Spanish) explores that specific application.

What is excluded, and what does it mean for a design to be new?

Article 6 excludes, among other cases, designs without a distinct configuration and their own novel appearance compared with earlier designs; features dictated by the product’s technical function; mere colour changes to known designs; and designs contrary to morality, accepted standards of behaviour or public order.

Changing the colour of a known chair is therefore insufficient to claim exclusive rights over its shape. This registration should not be used to monopolise a solution whose configuration is dictated by its technical function. If you have developed a mechanism or functional improvement, the patent or utility model framework and its specific requirements need to be assessed.

Novelty is not limited to what you knew about or what was registered in Argentina. Earlier publication or public exploitation matters, including abroad. Searches should cover registers, catalogues, shops, websites and other sources of earlier designs. Finding a similar object calls for comparison; a search that finds nothing does not, on its own, guarantee a valid registration.

Should you register before showing the product online or selling it?

Yes: the safest approach is to file before disclosure. An Instagram post, online shop, trade fair or pre-sale campaign may make a design public. Waiting to see whether it sells well can jeopardise protection.

Argentine law provides an exception for certain disclosures within the six months preceding the application or priority date: disclosures resulting directly or indirectly from acts of the creator or their lawful successors; certain unlawful acts by third parties against them; and erroneous or improper publication of applications by the relevant INPI Directorate. The exception is not limited to trade fair displays.

This is not a general invitation to publish first and deal with registration later. If you have already shown the product, the dates, content and origin of the disclosure must be reconstructed to check whether the exception applies. Preserve the original posts, catalogues and records. Other countries may also have different rules: Argentina’s exception does not guarantee international protection.

Who should own the registration if someone else created the design?

The starting point is the creator and their lawful successors. Individuals and legal entities may own rights, but they must be able to explain how they acquired them. Paying for design work or receiving the final file does not, by itself, resolve all the documentation needed to establish ownership and exploitation rights.

Article 1 contains specific rules for employee-created designs. It recognises rights in the creator, with exceptions where the employee was specifically hired to create those designs or merely carried out instructions. If the design was created jointly by employer and employee, it belongs to both unless agreed otherwise. Joint creators also need to organise their rights.

Where an independent designer, agency, business partners or manufacturers are involved, review contracts, assignments and authorisations before filing. If the registration is transferred, Article 15 requires the transfer to be recorded with INPI before the acquirer can invoke rights arising from it. The importance of documenting that chain also appears in our analysis of trademarks, copyright and designs in the Entain case.

How to register an industrial model or design with INPI

First, define the subject matter and investigate earlier designs. Identify the appearance you want to protect, who will own the rights, whether there are variants and whether disclosure has already occurred. These issues should be discussed before the application is filed.

Second, prepare clear and consistent representations. Article 10 requires drawings, photographs or digital reproductions that sufficiently identify the subject matter. A description is optional. Images matter because they define visually what has been submitted: backgrounds, perspectives, details and consistency between views deserve careful review.

Third, complete the electronic application and pay the official fee. INPI’s official guide to a single-design application (in Spanish) explains access using an Argentine tax credential, entering the details and figures, electronic signature and payment. For three-dimensional models, it specifies a first figure in perspective and permits additional views under its requirements.

Fourth, address any objections and retain the certificate. Keep the application, filed images, payment records and ownership documents as well. INPI states a processing time of three working days from confirmation of payment for a single-design application. That is the service’s stated timeframe, not a promise for every application, and it does not include preparing the filing properly.

One application may include up to twenty models or designs if they are applied to or incorporated in products within the same Locarno class. This differs from the Nice Classification used for trademarks. Including one variant does not automatically protect all the others. When filing, the applicant may also request deferral of publication of the grant for up to six months from registration.

The certificate does not guarantee that the design is valid

Argentina’s registration system involves a formal examination, without substantive examination of novelty. INPI explains in its frequently asked questions on models and designs (in Spanish) that it does not check existing registrations to decide whether the design is new. The presumption favouring the first registrant can be rebutted.

Obtaining a certificate therefore does not make a known product new or cure defective ownership. Article 17 provides for judicial cancellation where registration was obtained by someone who was not the creator or in breach of the framework. Disputes fall within the jurisdiction of the federal courts. Before bringing a claim, weaknesses in your own registration must also be reviewed.

How long does protection last, how is it renewed, and what does it cost?

Protection lasts five years from filing and can be extended for two consecutive periods of the same length: fifteen years in total. It cannot be renewed indefinitely. Renewal must be requested during the final six months of the term; the law also permits filing within six months after expiry, subject to the applicable fee. The practical approach is to diarise renewal before expiry.

A quotation should distinguish official fees, preparation of images, review of earlier designs and professional fees. Multiple-design applications, renewals or additional procedures may change the cost. To keep this guide useful, we avoid stating a figure that will become outdated: check the current official procedures and fees (in Spanish) when filing.

Where does the registration apply, and what if you want to export?

An Argentine registration provides territorial protection in Argentina. It does not grant worldwide rights or automatically extend protection to every country where you sell. If you plan to export, manufacture abroad or present the product internationally, the strategy should be organised before disclosure.

The Paris Convention allows priority to be claimed in other participating countries within six months of the first filing, subject to the applicable requirements. Priority does not mean automatic registration: the relevant applications still need to be filed. Nor should that six-month period from filing be confused with Argentina’s prior-disclosure exception: they are different rules with different starting dates.

How can you enforce an industrial design if someone copies it?

1. Preserve evidence. Keep links, dates, listings, seller details, invoices and, where appropriate, a sample of the product. If online content may disappear, consider an appropriate method of formally recording it. Individual screenshots can be useful, but their evidential weight depends on the context and how they were obtained and preserved.

2. Review the registration and compare the products. Check ownership, the remaining term of protection, the filed images and earlier designs. Then identify which protected features the other product reproduces or imitates. There is no general legal rule that “changing 20%” avoids infringement; nor does every resemblance establish a successful claim. Expert evidence may be necessary.

3. Choose a proportionate response. Depending on the case, this may involve demanding that the use stop, negotiating a licence or settlement, or using a platform’s reporting procedure. Removal of a listing is not equivalent to a court finding of infringement and does not guarantee compensation.

4. Assess court action and urgency. Articles 19 and 20 provide for cessation of unauthorised exploitation and compensation for damage. Articles 24 and 25 regulate specific evidence-gathering measures and security requirements, as well as possible suspension of exploitation and seizure of products under their conditions. Judicial involvement and evidence are required: a certificate does not, by itself, trigger an immediate block.

The law also provides a criminal route for specified conduct, subject to its own requirements; not every disagreement over similarity automatically amounts to a criminal offence. Article 23 requires the registration certificate to accompany claims under this framework. Damages, time limits and available measures must be assessed against the chosen action and the facts: a criminal limitation period should not simply be applied to a civil claim.

What if you did not register, or also have trademark and copyright protection?

Without registration, you cannot assume you have the specific protection provided by Decree-Law 6673/63: Article 4 requires registration. Nevertheless, it is worth checking whether filing is still possible and whether other rights or breaches are involved. A confidentiality agreement, assignment, trademark or original copyright work may raise different issues. None automatically replaces a lost opportunity to register.

A single product may involve several forms of protection: ornamental appearance, a distinctive sign, a technical solution and potentially a copyright work. Each has its own requirements. In addition, Article 28 prevents the industrial design framework and Copyright Law 11,723 from being invoked simultaneously in judicial enforcement of rights over the same model or design where both deposits have been made. The strategy requires selecting and substantiating the appropriate legal routes.

An example: a chair designed for a business in Córdoba

Imagine an SME commissions a chair with a novel silhouette. Before launch, it documents its rights with the designer, investigates earlier designs and files consistent images of the model. The product line’s commercial name is assessed separately as a trademark. Any folding mechanism requires a separate technical analysis.

Months later, a chair appears with a different name and colour but with ornamental features that may reproduce the filed model. Changing the name does not rule out a design claim. The business must compare the appearances and review its registration; it cannot prohibit all folding chairs either. Its rights extend to the legally protected subject matter, not the entire product category.

At Herrera & Flamenco Abogados, we assist with assessing, registering and enforcing rights in creations from our base in Córdoba, Argentina. Our intellectual property services for designers and businesses help organise protection alongside ownership and contracts, before launch or when a dispute arises.

Frequently asked questions

Do I need an invention to register an industrial design? A technical invention is not required. The assessment concerns an ornamental appearance that meets the legal requirements of novelty and a distinct configuration. A functional improvement calls for examination under a different framework.

Can I register a product I have already posted on Instagram? The timing, content and source of the post must be reviewed. The law provides for certain disclosures within the six months before the application or priority date, but the exception has conditions and does not guarantee protection in other countries.

If I have registered the trademark, is the shape protected too? Not necessarily. Trademarks and industrial models or designs protect different aspects. The scope of each registration needs to be checked separately.

Will INPI stop copies as soon as I show my certificate? Not automatically. The certificate is a tool for enforcement; cessation, compensation and court measures require the relevant legal conditions and evidence. Validity, ownership, the remaining term and the scope of the registration should be reviewed first.

A single logo may be protected as a trademark, as a graphic work under copyright and, if it meets the relevant requirements, as an industrial design. Each form of protection requires different evidence: registering the trademark does not, by itself, establish that you acquired the rights to the artwork. The English case of Entain v Liquidity Trading shows what can happen when that distinction arises in a claim. For businesses in Argentina, the practical lesson is clear: alongside choosing the right protection, you need to be able to trace who created the design and how the rights reached your company.

The Entain case: betting logos on third-party platforms

Entain, a group that owns several betting brands, sued the operators of platforms including Outplayed. These explained how to benefit from promotional offers through matched betting, using opposing bets. They displayed bookmakers’ logos to identify offers and reproduced content from their websites. The claimants alleged trademark and copyright infringement; the defendants relied on referential use, among other defences.

In Entain Operations Limited & Ors v Liquidity Trading Limited & Ors, [2026] EWHC 2330 (Ch), the court found that the copyright claim had not been adequately pleaded. The claimants needed to specify the works and their original contributions, identify which claimant held rights in each work and explain the chain of title. Successive design versions and corporate acquisitions made that history especially important.

This was a procedural decision. The court ruled that the copyright infringement allegations should be struck out, while contemplating that the strike-out would take effect only if the claimants failed to correct them within a prescribed period. It did not decide that the logos were unprotected or that Outplayed was free to copy them. The trademark merits remained unresolved.

Why the choice between a trademark claim and a copyright claim matters

A trademark distinguishes goods or services and identifies their commercial origin. Copyright protects creative expression. That difference changes the discussion: the same use may require an assessment of how a sign is presented to the public and, separately, whether a protected work was reproduced without permission.

Consider a platform that compares offers and places each supplier’s logo beside them. It may argue that the logo tells readers whose offer they are viewing. The supplier may challenge the presentation, an apparent commercial connection or the use of its reputation. If it also relies on rights in the artwork, another question arises: precisely which work was reproduced, and who is entitled to bring that claim?

Our reading is that copyright can change the ground on which a dispute is fought, but it does not remove its own requirements. A defence relevant to trademarks does not necessarily answer a reproduction claim. Conversely, describing a claim as copyright infringement does not replace the need to identify the work, establish its protection and show the claimant’s title. Nor does it justify disregarding the limits of either regime.

Different situations also need to be separated: naming a business, displaying its logo to identify it, reproducing a banner and copying the appearance of an entire webpage do not necessarily raise the same issue. The extent and context of the reproduction matter. We would therefore avoid predicting a single answer for every item used by a platform.

In Argentina, trademark registration does not settle the designer’s rights

Article 4 of Law 22,362 provides that ownership of a trademark and the exclusive right to use it are obtained through registration. That title has a specific function: protecting the sign within trademark law. It does not certify that every copyright interest in the image was transferred to the applicant.

A company may have commissioned its visual identity from an agency, received the files and registered the sign. To assess a claim over copying the artwork, it will also need to examine its relationship with the people who created it. The trademark file and the design contracts answer different questions; neither should be assumed from the other.

This also matters when buying a business. Acquiring a trademark, purchasing shares in a company and receiving an assignment of copyright are different transactions. Before concluding which assets passed to the buyer, the parties need to examine what was purchased, who owned it and which documents implemented the transaction.

Copyright: paying for the logo does not mean acquiring all its rights

Assessing a logo’s protection as a graphic work starts with identifying its original expression. The business name and the graphic work are not interchangeable: a sign that can be registered as a trademark does not automatically meet the requirements for copyright protection. The official Argentine guide to intellectual property distinguishes protection of creative works from ownership of ideas and includes drawings among protected works.

On ownership, Law 11,723 allows rights to be assigned and preserves certain author’s rights even after a work has been transferred. Article 54 distinguishes acquiring certain artistic works from acquiring reproduction rights, unless otherwise agreed. The specific rule in Article 4(d), concerning computer programs created by employees hired to develop them, should not be automatically applied to every logo.

It is therefore sensible to document in writing what the client receives: which design and versions the agreement covers, what reproductions and modifications are permitted, in which media and with what transfer rights. The agreement should also identify fonts, photographs or other third-party materials subject to their own licences. Delivery of the editable file does not, by itself, answer all these questions.

Where an agency was involved, checking only the final contract may not be enough. The designer–agency–client chain needs to explain the origin of the rights offered. A broad supplier clause does not automatically reconstruct a missing earlier link.

Copyright registration helps, but does not replace the chain of title

Registration provides documentation. It does not make someone who submits another person’s work its true author, or cure a missing assignment by itself. A business should keep its files, versions, contracts and relevant registration records together.

Article 63 of Law 11,723 also provides consequences for failure to register that need to be assessed in light of the work and the applicable treaty framework. We would not reduce this to “no registration means no rights”. We explain the distinction in our guide to copyright registration and deposits with Argentina’s National Copyright Office, the DNDA (in Spanish).

Industrial designs: another form of protection, with its own conditions

The comparison may also include industrial designs. Decree-Law 6,673/63 protects shapes or ornamental appearance applied to industrial or handicraft products. It requires registration and provides novelty requirements. An image’s commercial value or use as a trademark is not enough.

Training material from Argentina’s National Institute of Industrial Property, the INPI, includes logos, graphic symbols and interfaces among designs that may be filed. This makes the route worth considering for certain projects, without promising that any familiar logo can be registered after years of use. Prior disclosure and its dates need to be checked.

Two local distinctions matter. Article 1 contains a specific rule for designs created in an employment relationship, with exceptions depending on the engagement and instructions given. And Article 28 prevents simultaneous reliance on this regime and Law 11,723 in the judicial defence of the design covered by that provision.

The practical consequence is to distinguish possible overlapping protection from the way rights may be enforced in court. We would not recommend adding three legal labels to a claim without examining compatibility, the protected subject matter and the conduct challenged. Trademark distinctiveness, copyright originality and design novelty involve different assessments.

An example: a Córdoba business’s logo on a comparison site

Imagine you run an equipment business in Córdoba, Argentina, and an agency created its visual identity. You registered the trademark. Later, a price comparison site displays your logo to identify prices and also reproduces a banner created for a campaign.

The first step would be to preserve the publication, its date, the complete webpage and its context. Then identify what was used: the name, the logo version, the banner, photographs or a combination. It would also be worth checking whether any permission or relevant terms of use existed.

On trademarks, the assessment would consider how the business is presented and what relationship the comparison site suggests. On copyright, it would examine who created each item and which rights you acquired. If the banner contains a stock photograph, its licence deserves separate attention. If a registered design exists, its scope and the available enforcement strategy will matter.

Collecting screenshots of the copy is not enough: you also need to organise the history of the original. That work helps determine what to claim, against whom and to what extent, rather than sending a demand asserting rights that have not yet been documented.

What to check before commissioning, buying or bringing a claim over a design

Identify the asset. Keep approved versions and distinguish the logo from the rest of the visual identity. If there were redesigns, retain records of what changed and who was involved. This avoids treating different files as though they were a single creation.

Review the rights received. The agreement should make clear what you can use, modify, reproduce and transfer. If the supplier works with collaborators, you need supporting documentation for that chain. The same applies when buying a business with an established visual identity.

Choose protection to suit the project. Trademarks, copyright documentation and potential design registration need to be assessed against their own requirements and timelines. An early review can identify problems before packaging is printed, a campaign is launched or a new design is disclosed.

Define the dispute before making the claim. Identifying a business, suggesting an affiliation and reproducing a work may call for different arguments. The response should be grounded in the actual use and the rights you can establish.

In our intellectual property and trademark advisory work in Argentina, this combined review helps organise protection and assess disputes on a clear documentary basis. Entain is a useful reminder: a strategy starts with understanding the asset you hold and how it came into your hands.

Frequently asked questions

Does registering a logo as a trademark make me the owner of its design? Registration establishes a trademark right. Rights in the graphic work also require examination of its creation, the contracts and the relevant transfers.

Can I use another business’s logo simply to identify it? The context and the rights involved need to be assessed. An informational purpose matters, but it is not general permission to reproduce any graphic material or content.

Can a logo be protected as an industrial design? This may be an option if it meets the regime’s requirements. Before filing, the representation of the design, its novelty and any prior disclosure should be reviewed.

What should I keep if an agency created my visual identity? The contract, applicable assignments and permissions, final files, versions and records covering third-party materials. A design invoice does not necessarily describe the full extent of the rights received.

If your business partner runs the company but refuses to show you its accounts, you can request information and access to documents through the procedures available for your company. You do not have to manage the business or hold a majority stake to exercise the rights attached to your ownership interest. Start by reviewing the company’s governing documents, requesting specific records and keeping evidence of the response. If access remains blocked or serious irregularities emerge, court action may be necessary to obtain documents, challenge decisions or seek measures affecting management.

Being an owner and managing the company are different roles

In many small businesses, one owner handles sales and production while another controls banking, payments and bookkeeping. That arrangement can work for years. Problems arise when the person in charge starts saying “I take care of that”, delays financial statements or provides only a revenue figure without explaining expenses.

An owner holds an interest in the company; a manager runs its activities and represents it within the scope of their authority. The same person may perform both roles, but they remain distinct. Contributing more money or holding a larger stake does not make the company’s assets personal property or eliminate the other owners’ rights.

It is also important to establish the legal relationship you actually have. Lending money, working in the business or receiving a promise of an ownership interest does not, by itself, establish that you are a member or shareholder. Before deciding what to claim, review the governing documents, amendments, transfers and relevant registers. An Argentine SRL, an SAS and an informal business arrangement may require different approaches.

Your right to access company accounts

Article 55 of Argentina’s General Companies Law recognises the right to inspect company books and records and request reports from management. It is an important tool for members of SRLs, Argentina’s limited liability companies, that do not fall within the statutory exception for mandatory oversight. It enables you to review management even if you do not hold a management position.

The rule does not apply in the same way to every company. For SRLs subject to mandatory oversight, Article 55 provides an exception unless the governing documents state otherwise. In sociedades anónimas, or SAs, oversight generally operates through corporate bodies; those that validly dispense with a statutory supervisory officer, known as a síndico, have the inspection rights provided by Article 284. Review the company’s actual structure before sending a generic request.

For an SAS, a simplified joint-stock company, the constitutive instrument must be read together with Law 27,349 and the company-law provisions that apply on a supplementary basis. The law allows flexibility in governance and an optional supervisory body. It also requires bookkeeping, financial statements and records such as the minutes book and share register. That flexibility does not permit management without records or information for shareholders.

Access must be exercised in good faith and in a way compatible with the company’s activities. It does not entitle you to take its files, obtain someone else’s personal banking passwords or disclose commercial information. Depending on the circumstances, an inspection can be arranged at the company premises with professional assistance and confidentiality safeguards.

Which documents should you request?

“Show me the accounts” expresses the problem, but does not clearly define the information you need. It is more useful to identify a period and the documents needed to reconstruct what happened: for example, the latest completed financial year and subsequent transactions explaining a debt or a reduction in funds.

Financial statements and decisions: balance sheets and other financial statements, their notes and reports where applicable, approval minutes and decisions concerning profits, loans or investments. An income statement shows the result for a period; a bank balance alone does not explain whether the business made a profit or a loss.

Income, expenditure and supporting records: sales records, expense receipts, banking documentation for company accounts and reconciliations, insofar as they are relevant to the oversight rights you can exercise. If you do not understand a payment, ask for the recipient, purpose and supporting document.

Debts and sensitive transactions: loans, outstanding cheques, guarantees, tax debts and significant contracts. Transactions with another business owned by the manager or with related parties deserve particular attention, as they may involve a conflict of interest requiring explanation.

You do not need to request every document in the office indiscriminately. A specific request makes it easier to assess whether the response is sufficient and identify what remains unexplained. An independent accountant can help interpret the records; a lawyer determines the scope of your rights and how to enforce them.

A balance sheet does not answer every question

The law requires certain financial documents to be available to owners before they are considered. Article 67 of the General Companies Law requires the statements and documents it lists to be available at least fifteen days beforehand. The applicable documents and requirements must be checked against the company’s legal form.

This matters because voting on financial statements without an opportunity to examine them prevents an informed decision. Receiving a balance sheet does not make subsequent questions about its supporting records irrelevant. If an item groups together substantial payments without detail, it may be necessary to inspect the underlying transactions.

That review must be distinguished from a standalone court claim for an accounting. In formally organised companies, access to information and assessment of management follow specific corporate mechanisms. The general accounting rules in Argentina’s Civil and Commercial Code should not automatically be applied to every disagreement between owners. First identify the relationship, the obligation and the appropriate claim.

How to act when answers never arrive

First, gather evidence of your ownership interest and the company’s operating rules. Check who manages it, how meetings are called, which body supervises management and whether there is a dispute-resolution clause. Not having a separate owners’ agreement does not remove rights arising from the law and the company’s governing documents.

Next, make a request that can be evidenced. Specify the documents, period, explanations required and a proposed arrangement for access. Keep evidence of receipt and the response. Depending on the circumstances, a formal notice with proof of delivery may be appropriate. The response period should reflect the request and its urgency: there is no single deadline suitable for every case.

If access remains blocked, use the relevant internal procedures. You may need to request discussion at a meeting, ask the supervisory body to act or have objections recorded. Do not sign an approval of documents you have been unable to review without considering the consequences. Corporate decisions may be subject to short time limits for challenge.

Keep emails, messages and documents obtained lawfully. Do not respond to withheld information by taking cash, changing locks or blocking access on your own initiative. Those actions may harm the business and create another dispute over your conduct.

What can you ask a court to do?

If internal procedures do not resolve the problem, a court claim should be designed around what is missing and what can be proved. It may seek access to or production of documents, challenge a corporate decision, remove a manager or claim compensation for loss. These remedies are not interchangeable or automatic consequences of silence.

Removing someone from management does not remove their ownership interest. An irregularity also does not guarantee compensation: a damages claim requires analysis of the conduct, the loss and who has standing to bring it. Loss to the company’s assets is different from direct loss suffered by an individual owner.

Where a manager’s acts or omissions place the company in serious danger, Articles 113 to 116 of the General Companies Law provide for interim court intervention. This may involve appointing an observer to monitor and report, a co-manager or a manager, with duties and a term set by the judge.

The law requires evidence of the claimant’s ownership interest, the danger and its seriousness, exhaustion of remedies under the governing documents and the filing of a removal action. It also requires security for potential harm caused by the measure. Courts assess whether intervention is appropriate restrictively. A disagreement over expenses or a delayed response does not, by itself, amount to that danger.

If there are concrete indications of unjustified withdrawals, disappearing records or debts threatening the company’s continued operation, the urgency should be assessed immediately. The aim is to protect the company through a measure proportionate to the risk, preserving its operation where possible.

A Córdoba case: documentation made the difference

In “Martinat, Gabriel Nicolás c/ I+DA Argentina SAS y otro”, Córdoba’s 52nd Civil and Commercial Court ordered the manager’s removal for just cause in Judgment No. 1 of 3 February 2025. The action was brought by a shareholder holding 15% of the company.

The court assessed multiple irregularities supported by documents and reports from a court-appointed co-manager. These included cash withdrawals with no justified destination, difficulties accessing the accounts and insufficiently explained transactions. The lack of information formed part of a pattern of serious failures; removal was not ordered simply because one shareholder distrusted another.

The judgment also explained that attempts at an internal solution should not become an insurmountable obstacle where proven circumstances made them futile. That assessment was specific to the case. It does not mean prior meetings or requests can always be omitted. The practical lesson is to document both the irregularities and the steps taken to obtain an answer.

An example: sales are growing, but no one explains where the money is

Imagine that you own 30% of an SRL not subject to mandatory oversight. Your partner is the manager, sales appear to be growing and you are told “there are no profits”. When you request information, you receive a screenshot of the bank balance but no supporting records. Meanwhile, payments are made to another company owned by your partner.

This warrants review, but does not yet establish that funds have been diverted. There may be debts, investments or legitimate expenses. The first aim is to reconstruct income, expenditure and related-party transactions through records. If management refuses access, an information problem has been identified; if the records reveal unjustified transactions, the scope of the dispute changes.

You cannot simply take 30% of the cash yourself. Owning an interest does not make you the direct owner of that percentage of each payment received. Profit distributions depend on distributable earnings, financial statements and valid decisions. Access to the accounts enables an informed discussion; it does not authorise unilateral withdrawals.

Restoring transparency without destroying the business

Sometimes the most useful outcome is an agreement on regular reports, shared documents, controls over related-party transactions and meetings with recorded decisions. If the relationship has deteriorated too far, an exit based on a supported valuation may need to be negotiated. Without reliable information, it is also difficult to know what your interest is worth.

Our Spanish-language guide to what an owners’ agreement should include explains rules that help prevent these problems. Our comparison of SAS and SRL structures for a business in Argentina, also in Spanish, covers organisational differences that affect working relationships between owners.

If a dispute already exists, our business and company-law practice in Córdoba, Argentina can review your ownership interest, governing documents and available records to define an information request and assess further measures. The appropriate approach depends on what is happening and the response you need.

Frequently asked questions

Can I request information if I hold a small stake? Yes. A minority interest does not remove the information rights available to you. The procedure and scope depend on the company’s legal form, its oversight arrangements and the applicable rules.

Do I need an owners’ agreement to see the accounts? No. An agreement can organise access and reporting, but legal rights and obligations also exist. The company’s governing documents and legal framework must be reviewed.

Can I remove my partner for withholding information? Removal from their management position may be considered through the relevant corporate or court procedures. This requires assessment of the seriousness, evidence and prior steps; it is different from excluding them as an owner.

Does withholding information prove that my partner took money? No. It requires clarification and may amount to a breach of duty, but diversion of funds must be proved. Requesting documents and obtaining professional review helps distinguish the issues.

A divorce granted abroad can be recognised in Argentina, but holding the judgment—even with an apostille—does not mean it has already been registered with the Argentine Civil Registry. In Córdoba, you normally need to apply for judicial recognition through the procedure known as exequatur and obtain a court order for registration. The route depends on the country of origin, any applicable treaties, your documents and the effect you need the divorce to have: establishing your marital status, remarrying or addressing a property issue.

What is exequatur for a foreign divorce?

Exequatur is the procedure through which an Argentine court checks whether a foreign decision meets the requirements to have legal effects here. For a divorce, the purpose may be to recognise the dissolution of the marriage and order its registration. In principle, it does not mean reopening the reasons for the separation or starting a second divorce from scratch.

The review covers the authenticity of the documents, the international jurisdiction of the original court, the finality of the decision and compliance with procedural safeguards. It also identifies conflicts with Argentine decisions or fundamental principles of the Argentine legal system. An email from your lawyer abroad or a screenshot of an online court record is therefore not enough.

This situation should be distinguished from that of someone who has not yet divorced and needs to decide where to start proceedings. For a local divorce, see our guide to divorce in Córdoba (in Spanish). If a foreign judgment already exists, the starting point is to review it and determine the recognition process that applies.

Recognition, registration and enforcement: what do you need?

Recognising the divorce means accepting its legal effects in Argentina. Registering it means recording that decision with the Civil Registry. Enforcing an obligation means requiring compliance with something ordered in the judgment, such as a payment. Different parts of the same decision may need to be assessed separately.

Article 77 of Law 26,413 allows marriages and judgments dissolving marriages from other countries to be registered when the legal requirements are met. Registration must be ordered by a competent judge after the registry’s general directorate has been given an opportunity to comment. If the document is in another language, Article 76 requires a translation by a registered public translator.

This addresses a common misunderstanding: taking an apostilled judgment to the Civil Registry does not replace judicial intervention. Where the marriage is recorded also matters. If it took place in Argentina, the registry office, marriage record and registration details must be identified. If it took place abroad, it may be necessary to arrange the documents and registration of the foreign marriage alongside its dissolution.

What Córdoba’s courts review

Articles 825 to 827 of Córdoba’s Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure give priority to applicable treaties. Where no treaty governs the case, the requirements include a final judgment, a court with international jurisdiction, personal service on the respondent and an opportunity to defend the case, authentic documents, compatibility with Argentine public policy and no conflict with an earlier or simultaneous Argentine judgment.

The decision must be final. You need to establish that it has the authority of a final judgment in its country of origin. A provisional order or a judgment still open to a relevant challenge is not necessarily equivalent to a final divorce. A separate court certificate may be needed in addition to the judgment.

There must have been an effective opportunity to defend the case. If the other spouse did not participate, the records of service must be reviewed. Their absence does not, by itself, make recognition impossible, but it does not remove the need to examine how they were summoned. Treaty provisions may affect this assessment.

There must be a valid jurisdictional connection. It is not enough for the foreign court to regard itself as competent under its own law. Argentina’s Civil and Commercial Code sets out rules on international jurisdiction: Article 2621 refers to the last effective marital domicile and the respondent spouse’s domicile or habitual residence. The assessment must also take account of applicable treaties and the circumstances of the proceedings.

The outcome must respect fundamental principles. International public policy does not require the foreign procedure to be identical to Argentina’s. Article 2600 of the Civil and Commercial Code addresses outcomes incompatible with fundamental principles. Differences in terminology, time limits or the structure of proceedings should not automatically be treated as such an incompatibility.

Does an apostille automatically make the divorce valid?

No. As the Argentine Consulate in Barcelona explains, an apostille authenticates the origin of a public document; it does not certify its content. It does not determine whether the court had jurisdiction or whether the right to a defence was respected. It is part of the documentation, rather than an Argentine judgment recognising the divorce.

Authentication must follow the mechanism applicable to the document and its issuing country. Where the Apostille Convention applies, the competent authority in the country of origin handles the apostille. In other cases, consular legalisation or a treaty exemption may apply. Before paying for translations or certifications, check which documents your case actually requires.

Documents to prepare

The complete judgment and an authentic copy. Obtain the document issued or certified by the competent authority, including all pages, relevant attachments and court details. A short divorce certificate may be useful for certain purposes, but it does not necessarily replace the decision required for recognition.

Proof of finality and records of service. Depending on how the divorce was processed, you may need a certificate confirming that the decision is final, service records or documents showing the other spouse’s participation. Gathering these at the outset helps identify missing items before filing.

The marriage record and identification. Locate the Argentine marriage record or foreign certificate, personal details and current addresses. Differences in surnames, transliterations or identity document numbers must be explained with supporting evidence, rather than informally corrected on the file.

Authentication, translation and representation. Where required, include apostilles or legalisations and certified public translations of the relevant documents, including their stamps and certifications. If you live abroad and will act through a representative, the power of attorney must also meet the necessary formalities. The final document list depends on the country, the court and the purpose of the application.

How the procedure works and which court handles it

The first step is to review the judgment, the country of origin, the documents and the purpose of recognition. Article 826 of the Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure refers exequatur applications to the rules governing incidental proceedings. The application is then filed with the competent court, any required participation and service steps are completed, and the court decides whether the judgment can take effect. If recognition is granted and registration ordered, the decision is communicated to the Civil Registry and the resulting record is checked.

Article 16(10) of Law 10,305 includes the registration of foreign documents and judgments concerning family matters within the family courts’ subject-matter jurisdiction. However, you should not assume the same court always handles the application: related inheritance proceedings may change the answer.

There is no single timeframe that can be promised for every case. Document availability, translations, international service, requests for additional information and subsequent registration all affect timing. A quotation should distinguish legal fees, court expenses and external costs. If you are planning a wedding or a property transaction, raise the date when you enquire, without assuming recognition will be immediate.

A Córdoba decision shows why delaying can cause problems

In “Adamo, María Estela, en representación de Torres, Marco Brian y Torres, Daniel Alan”, Order 37 of 28 February 2025, Córdoba’s Superior Court of Justice resolved a jurisdictional conflict between a civil court and a family court. Recognition of a divorce granted in New Mexico, United States, in 1996 had been requested during proceedings to establish the heirs of one of the divorced spouses.

The Superior Court decided that the court handling the estate should deal with the application because recognition could affect the former spouse’s entitlement to inherit. The ruling determined which court should hear the application; it did not itself grant recognition of the divorce. The practical lesson is clear: an unresolved document issue can resurface decades later and require heirs to obtain records from another country.

Example: you divorced in Spain and want to remarry in Argentina

Imagine you married in Córdoba, later lived with your spouse in Spain and obtained a divorce judgment there. You return to Argentina with an apostilled copy, but your Argentine marriage record still does not reflect the dissolution.

Before booking a date for your next marriage, review the judgment, its finality, the necessary supporting records and the local marriage record. The next step is to arrange the recognition and registration required in your case. Once the procedure is complete, an updated marriage record allows you to check that the annotation has been made. Your existing apostille may be useful, but it does not, on its own, remove these steps.

What about property and other parts of the judgment?

Recognising the dissolution of the marriage does not automatically resolve everything the judgment says about money, housing or property in Argentina. If you need to collect a payment or rely on an allocation of property, the scope of the decision, applicable treaties and specific legal rules must be reviewed. Real estate in Argentina may raise issues of exclusive jurisdiction that require a separate assessment.

Recognition of the divorce should also be distinguished from the division of property between former spouses (in Spanish). A judgment may dissolve the marriage while leaving financial issues unresolved. If you live abroad, the initial consultation can be arranged remotely; the representation and procedural steps required can then be determined.

To review the country of origin, the documents you already have and the legal effect you need, you can use our family law services in Córdoba, Argentina. Planning the application around the complete judgment is usually more useful than buying certifications without a clear plan.

Frequently asked questions

Do I have to get divorced again in Argentina? In principle, if a suitable foreign judgment already exists, the application is for its recognition and the corresponding registration. Its scope and the relevant requirements must first be checked.

Can I start the process while living abroad? It may be arranged through a representative with an appropriate power of attorney and the necessary documents. Whether travel can be avoided depends on the steps required in your case.

Does my former spouse need to sign again for the divorce to be recognised? New consent should not be confused with service requirements and procedural safeguards. Your former spouse’s unwillingness to cooperate does not, by itself, remove the possibility of applying for recognition. How they were notified and what participation is required must be assessed.

Can I remarry as soon as my divorce judgment has an apostille? You should not assume so. Check the applicable recognition requirements, registration and documents requested by the Civil Registry before setting a date.

The Government has announced a programme to apply for Argentine citizenship through a USD 350,000 contribution or a USD 800,000 public debt instrument, but making the payment does not guarantee citizenship. To assess this route, you need to distinguish the announced conditions, the procedure that is actually made available and the applicable legal framework. The judicial decision concerning the decree that established the scheme also deserves attention.

What the Government announced about citizenship by investment

The official statement of 2 October 2026 envisages accepting applications during the fourth quarter of this year. It offers two routes: a non-refundable USD 350,000 contribution to the Treasury or subscription to a dedicated USD 800,000 public debt instrument.

For family members, it announces USD 100,000 per spouse or child aged 18 to 25 who is unmarried and has no children, and USD 25,000 per child under 18. Its example of a principal applicant, spouse and two minor children totals USD 500,000. It does not give an exact opening date or specify the instrument’s financial terms.

An official announcement and implementing rules serve different purposes

A government statement explains the proposed scheme. To submit an application, however, you need to identify the applicable rules and the competent authority’s operational instructions. This distinction matters particularly when the decision involves a substantial transfer and a personal objective that cannot easily be replaced, such as acquiring citizenship.

As of this article’s review date, 3 October 2026, the sources consulted confirm the announcement but do not establish that an application channel is already open for these two options. A reference to the fourth quarter does not mean applications have been available since the first day of October.

The review should establish which legal instrument sets the amounts and conditions, when it takes effect and how compliance is documented. If a commercial offer promises to start the process immediately, ask for the relevant rule and the official channel being used. A sales presentation or private form does not replace that verification.

Where the scheme comes from: the 2025 decrees

Emergency Decree 366/2025 introduced into Law 346 a naturalisation route based on a qualifying investment, regardless of the length of residence. It also tasked the Ministry of Economy with defining eligible investments and created a specialised agency.

Subsequently, Decree 524/2025 established a procedure involving an assessment of the investment, reports from competent bodies and an Agency recommendation to the National Directorate of Migration. Article 4 provides for Migration to decide within thirty working days after receiving that report. This period does not cover the entire application: it begins after the preceding steps. Article 6 provides for supplementary rules.

It would therefore be misleading to advertise citizenship “in thirty days” based on that article. Estimating the actual duration requires knowing the operational procedure, its stages and the rules applicable to each application.

The ruling on the emergency decree must be examined

On 30 June 2026, the National Electoral Court decided “Yang, Liping”, case CNE 8843/2023/CA1. It declared Emergency Decree 366/2025 null and upheld judicial jurisdiction over citizenship matters. The judgment challenged the use of a decree to change rules connected with political rights and ordered notification to the authorities and federal judges with electoral jurisdiction.

That case did not concern an application under the economic options now announced. Its existence requires examining the programme’s legal basis, the status of any appeals and subsequent rules before recommending an application. This research did not verify a later decision that would justify stating that the dispute has been definitively resolved.

The new statement, by itself, does not establish that the judgment has been overturned or modified. Equally, it would be inaccurate to turn that precedent into a claim that every future application must necessarily have the same outcome. The answer requires examining the proceedings and the rules applicable when the case begins. Our article on the citizenship ruling and Migration’s jurisdiction (in Spanish) discusses that precedent.

Why a Treasury contribution and a debt instrument are different

The two alternatives need separate analysis. A contribution described as non-refundable should not be treated as capital you will recover once the procedure ends. Subscribing to a debt instrument requires knowing its terms: maturity, payments, transferability and conditions connected with the application.

The announcement does not establish an interest rate, a holding period, a repayment guarantee or what happens if citizenship is refused. Nor does it mean that any Argentine government bond qualifies. Those questions must be answered through the instrument’s documentation and implementing rules, without filling gaps with an intermediary’s promises.

You should also distinguish the principal contribution from any expenses for documents, translations, certifications or advice. We do not present the announced amounts as an all-inclusive budget because a complete schedule of programme costs has not been verified.

What checks an application may involve

The announcement envisages assessment of identity, background, immigration history and the source of funds, with specialised bodies involved and a final decision by Migration under the announced scheme. The process is not limited to checking a bank balance.

When preparing a case, it is useful to organise records explaining how your wealth was accumulated and how the money would be transferred. Having funds available and being able to establish their origin are different matters. The required documents must be checked against the operational rules; an indicative list should not be presented as a final official requirement.

If the capital comes from a sale, inheritance or business activity, review whether the supporting records are consistent with the proposed transaction. Sensitive documents should be shared through an appropriate channel after agreeing the scope of the professional review.

A practical example: a family considering the programme

Imagine a couple with two minor children considering a move to Argentina. They see the official example and use USD 500,000 as an initial reference. Before paying, they need to verify whether their family composition meets the final rules, which route they will use and what additional costs might arise.

They also need to clarify when payments are made, who receives the funds, how the transaction is evidenced and what happens if the application is queried or refused. If they choose the debt instrument, they need its terms. If they choose the contribution, they must understand what its non-refundable nature means. These questions belong in the initial assessment, not after the transfer.

Citizenship, residence and tax status: assess each objective

Acquiring citizenship, being authorised to reside and determining your tax position are separate issues. You should not assume that approval automatically resolves the others or establishes a particular tax treatment. Planning should identify what each family member wants to achieve and which rules affect their activities and assets.

Article 20 of the Argentine Constitution provides for naturalisation through residence and the possibility of shortening the period for services to the Republic. The announcement of an economic route does not turn the general framework into a process that necessarily requires investment. If you already live in Argentina, review your individual circumstances before assuming you need to contribute capital.

What to do before committing money

Verify the source. Ask for the rules, financial instrument and official instructions supporting the proposed transaction. Check that they apply to the programme and the specific option you are considering.

Review the legal framework and your circumstances. Personal documentation, your immigration objective and the scheme’s legal background need to be assessed together. Do not treat a promise of approval or a fixed timeline as a guarantee without verifiable support.

Separate contracts and payments. Identify what is payable to the State, what relates to a financial instrument and what pays for professional services. Clarifying recipients, conditions and obligations avoids confusing advisory fees with compliance with the programme.

The practical conclusion is straightforward: the announcement allows you to begin assessing an option, but an investment decision requires reviewing its specific rules and risks. Before proceeding, seek a documented answer to every condition that could affect the outcome.

Frequently asked questions

Does buying property qualify for this programme? The announcement does not establish that any property purchase satisfies its conditions. Verify the accepted option before linking a purchase to a citizenship application.

Does the debt instrument guarantee recovery of the money? That conclusion requires knowing its terms and risks. The announced amount does not, by itself, explain payment or repayment conditions.

Can I apply now? The statement envisages opening during the fourth quarter. Before starting, check that an official application channel is available and which instructions apply.

Do I need to invest to apply for citizenship if I already live in Argentina? You should not assume so. The residence-based route and its requirements need to be assessed separately from the economic programme.

Information reviewed as of 3 October 2026. This article distinguishes the official announcement from the operational conditions and legal position that must be checked at the time of each application.

A technology transfer agreement in Argentina may allow an Argentine business to use know-how, industrial property rights, or specialized assistance supplied by a party based abroad in exchange for payment. Where the agreement meets the requirements of Law 22,426 and the relevant income tax rules, it may be registered with Argentina’s National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI). INPI Resolution 38/2026, published on February 2, 2026, simplified that process. The key business question is not merely whether the agreement uses the words “technology transfer,” but what is actually supplied, how it is paid for, and when registration is requested.

What does “technology transfer” mean in practice?

A manufacturer might receive a patented production process, engineering instructions, training, access to proprietary technical information, or a license to use a brand. The value may lie in a legal right, in expertise that people can apply, or in a combination of the two. The agreement should say exactly what the Argentine recipient receives and what the foreign provider remains entitled to control.

Three issues need separate answers. The contract sets out deliverables, payments, duration, and remedies. Intellectual property ownership determines whether a patent, trademark, or other right changes hands or is merely licensed. INPI registration records certain cross-border agreements for the purposes of Law 22,426 and its connection to the income tax rules. Registering an agreement does not, by itself, transfer ownership of a patent or trademark.

Which agreements fall within Argentina’s Law 22,426?

Article 1 of Law 22,426 covers agreements for consideration whose principal or ancillary purpose is the transfer, assignment, or licensing of technology or trademarks by a person domiciled abroad to a person domiciled in Argentina, provided the agreement has effects in Argentina. The domicile of each party, the paid nature of the arrangement, and its local effects matter more than the heading on the contract.

The 2026 regulation adds a registration test: the agreement must involve, in whole or in part, the services or rights described in Article 104(a)(1) or (2) of Argentina’s Income Tax Law and its implementing rules. One category concerns technical assistance, engineering, or consulting. The other addresses licenses and grants of use of rights, as applicable. Where a single agreement includes services in both categories, the regulation directs INPI to register and certify it under the second category.

For example, an Argentine plant might license a foreign patent and receive training to implement it. A company might pay for a foreign trademark license used in Argentina. Buying an imported machine, however, does not automatically make the sale a registrable technology transfer. Software subscriptions, administrative support, and other services also require a careful look at their substance and legal basis; their marketing label cannot settle the question.

License, assignment, and know-how: why the distinction matters

Under a license, the owner normally keeps the underlying right and permits another party to use it on agreed terms, such as territory, term, products, exclusivity, and royalties. An assignment of ownership changes who owns the right. Know-how involves practical, often confidential knowledge that can be delivered through manuals, controlled access, training, or technical support. A well-drafted know-how agreement needs rules for secrecy, permitted use, improvements, and what happens when the relationship ends.

INPI registration of a technology transfer agreement should not be confused with recording a change of ownership of a trademark or patent. They are separate processes. Our article on transferring a trademark or patent before INPI (in Spanish) explains the ownership procedure under a different 2026 resolution. If your transaction combines a license with an assignment, the documents should identify which rights remain licensed and which ones actually change owners.

What did INPI Resolution 38/2026 change?

The resolution repealed INPI Resolution 328/2005 and approved a new regulation. Its starting point is that registration is informational rather than an approval of the agreement. INPI therefore simplified the documentation and relies on statements made by the applicant under oath for matters within the new process. The regulation also applies to registration requests that were pending when it took effect.

To start an application, the regulation calls for a completed form, the contractual instrument and a translation when required, and payment of the applicable fee. It does not require certified signatures of the parties, consular legalization, or an apostille for those instruments, even if signed abroad. These are rules for this administrative filing; another transaction or dispute may have different evidentiary or formal requirements.

Where an applicant seeks the category for technical assistance, engineering, or consulting that cannot be obtained in Argentina, a sworn statement by the applicant is sufficient for that point in the INPI process. If the applicant states that the service is obtainable locally, or the agreement combines the two categories under Article 104(a), INPI registers and certifies it under the second category. Contractual wording, a particular way of providing the service, or payment terms should not block an otherwise eligible informational registration.

Less paperwork does not mean less responsibility for accuracy. The regulation refers to Article 14 of Law 22,426, which addresses deceptive statements or malicious concealment that harm the treasury. Argentina’s tax authority retains the power to examine the actual services and payments.

A new application form followed the resolution

The reference to the old RG10 form in Resolution 38/2026 was transitional. The later INPI Technology Transfer Directorate Provision 63/2026 approved a new form. The current official application distinguishes an initial registration or new independent contract from a certificate for a further period and an increase in the registered amount.

Before filling it in, gather the identity and tax details of both parties, any economic relationship between them, a concrete description of the services or rights, the payment method, the contract’s dates, the period to be certified, and the amount in the agreed currency. The form distinguishes technical assistance, engineering, or consulting from licenses and grants of use, and asks whether relevant services can be obtained in Argentina.

The approved form has four main pages and an optional fifth page for additional information. The provision says its format, content, and order must not be altered. INPI provides the current version through its technology transfer information page. A foreign party can take part in preparing the material, and either contracting party may submit the application.

Why register if registration is optional?

The practical reason often arises when the Argentine party pays the foreign provider. Resolution 38/2026 confirms the continued use of the INPI certificate referred to in Article 263 of the regulation to Argentina’s Income Tax Law. The certificate identifies a registered agreement, period, and amount for this framework.

Optional does not mean irrelevant. The parties can enter into a valid commercial arrangement without seeking this registration, but they should consider the tax consequences before the first cross-border payment. The applicable withholding treatment may also depend on the actual services, the tax position of the parties, their relationship, and any relevant double taxation treaty. An INPI certificate is an administrative record; it is not a tax ruling or a promise that a deduction or rate will be accepted.

Legal and accounting review work best together at the drafting stage. A single fee for a patent license, training, support, and use of a trademark may make it harder to determine what each payment represents. Clear descriptions, records of delivery, and a coherent payment schedule are more useful than trying to reconstruct the transaction after a payment has been questioned.

Timing rules: expired agreements, payments, and renewals

An agreement that has expired cannot be registered under the 2026 regulation. The application must specify the start and end dates of the period for which registration and a certificate are requested; that period may be shorter than, but not longer than, the agreement’s term. The currency chosen in the contract is used throughout the process and appears on the certificate.

Amounts paid before the registration request cannot be included in the registration or certificate. Amounts already accrued but still unpaid may be included, even if they relate to a previous tax year. The regulation also addresses tax gross-up amounts where the local party bears the foreign party’s tax cost. These rules make the date of filing and the payment calendar central to planning.

When the parties extend or renew an existing agreement, they may request a new certificate for the additional period while that renewed period remains in force. An increase in the amount sought for registration is also possible with supporting information and the fee on the difference. If the original file remains open, the increase is requested there; if it has already been decided, a new file is required.

How to prepare the registration

1. Map the actual transaction. Identify the technology, right, or assistance being supplied; the parties’ domiciles; where it will be used; and the reason for each payment. Check whether the arrangement has effects in Argentina.

2. Put the commercial rights in writing. Address the scope of use, territory, term, confidentiality, exclusivity, training, deliverables, improvements, royalties, taxes, and proof of performance. Confirm ownership of any trademark or patent before it is licensed.

3. Assess the tax categories. Separate technical services from licenses or grants of use where appropriate. Consider the statement about local availability of services, any tax treaty, and the documentation the Argentine payer will need.

4. Prepare the current INPI filing. Complete the 2026 form, attach the agreement and any required translation, specify an eligible period and unpaid amount, and pay the applicable fee. Either contracting party can apply.

5. Follow the electronic file. Observations are notified in the electronic case file, to which linked persons have access because the proceedings are reserved. The regulation provides an initial 30 calendar days to respond, followed by three automatic extensions of the same length. Keep the agreement, certificate, evidence of performance, and payment records together.

A cross-border example

A German company grants a manufacturer in Córdoba a license to use a patented process and agrees to provide six months of training. The contract sets an annual royalty for the patent and a separate training fee. Both sides should establish which rights are licensed, what the training actually delivers, how the services are documented, and whether the relevant service can be obtained in Argentina. Before paying, the Argentine party reviews the amount and period it can request for INPI certification, together with its tax obligations.

If it pays the first installments and only then applies, those payments cannot be added to the certificate. If the agreement expires, the original agreement cannot be registered after the fact. If the parties later renew it, the new period requires a certificate requested while that period is in force. Planning the registration when the agreement is negotiated is therefore far easier than trying to repair the sequence after payment.

Common mistakes to avoid

Treating every purchase as technology transfer. The commercial label does not replace the legal requirements. Confusing contract registration with a change of ownership. An assignment of a patent or trademark may require a separate ownership filing. Using a vague agreement. If the contract does not describe deliverables, access, and usage limits, it is harder to show what was supplied.

Applying too late. Previously paid amounts are excluded and expired agreements cannot be registered. Using an outdated form. The 2026 provision approved a replacement. Assuming the certificate settles the tax question. The underlying facts, contract, records, and applicable tax law still matter.

For a transaction involving trademarks, our guide to trademark registration in Argentina explains how the underlying right is secured. You can also explore our intellectual property services to review the assets that a cross-border agreement will use. Identifying each asset before signing helps prevent ownership and license disputes later.

Frequently asked questions

Is it mandatory to register a technology transfer agreement in Argentina? Registration under the current Law 22,426 framework is optional and informational. If an Argentine party will make payments abroad, the tax implications of obtaining or not obtaining the certificate should be reviewed before the first payment.

Can an expired agreement be registered? No. The 2026 regulation requires the agreement to be in force when registration is requested. A renewed period can support a new certificate if requested while that period is current.

Can payments already made be included? Amounts paid before filing are excluded. Accrued but unpaid amounts may be included, even if they relate to earlier tax years.

Does INPI approve the deal or determine the final tax result? No. Registration is informational. INPI issues a certificate within its remit; the tax authority can examine the declarations, actual services, and payments.

Yes, a short social media post can be protected by copyright if it expresses its author’s creative choices. And reporting on the post does not automatically entitle a news outlet to reproduce it in full. That is the central point of the Gândul Media judgment, Case C-598/24, delivered on 3 September 2026. The ruling interprets European Union law; in Argentina, a similar dispute must be assessed under Copyright Law 11,723.

What happened in Gândul Media?

A Romanian teacher published a 22-line Facebook post at the beginning of the school year. She explained to parents why she did not want to receive gifts from her pupils’ families. Days later, a journalist reproduced her entire text on a newspaper website without first seeking permission. The newspaper added her name and a link to the original post afterwards. The teacher brought a claim for an alleged infringement of her copyright.

The lower courts dismissed her claim because they considered that the post was not a protected work. On a reference from Romania’s highest court, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) addressed two legal questions: whether such a text can qualify as a work, and how much discretion a Member State has when implementing the exception for reporting current events. The CJEU did not finally decide whether an infringement occurred. It left the necessary factual assessments to the Romanian court.

A short post can be a copyrighted work

Under the CJEU’s approach, protection requires two elements: the author’s own intellectual creation and an identifiable expression of that creation. Originality can lie in the selection, arrangement and combination of words. It does not depend on the text being long, appearing in a book, or belonging to a formal literary genre. The judgment also explains that a text may fail the test if rules or constraints left its author no room for free creative choices.

This does not make every tweet, caption or everyday message a copyrighted work. A purely functional or commonplace sentence may lack the required originality. As to this teacher’s post, the CJEU identified indications of free and creative choices, but held that the national court must determine whether the text actually meets the conditions for protection.

The distinction also matters to people who publish professional content: copyright protects the original way in which you express an idea, not the underlying idea, fact or opinion in the abstract. Someone can report that a teacher declined gifts without necessarily appropriating the 22 lines in which she explained her reasons.

Reporting a story is not the same as copying everything

Article 5(3)(c) of EU Directive 2001/29 allows Member States to provide an exception for using works in connection with reporting current events, to the extent justified by the informatory purpose and with acknowledgement of the source and author where possible. The CJEU said that the school issue discussed in the post could be of public interest at that time. A news report need not include an extensive analysis or invite public debate to fall within the concept. Whether the event qualifies in this dispute remains for the Romanian court.

Romania limited that exception to short extracts. The CJEU found that a limit of this kind is permissible if it is proportionate and preserves the purpose of the exception. A news article may explain the event and quote what is needed; reproducing an entire work may replace the original communication, removing any reason for readers to consult it. The judgment acknowledges a difficult case where a text is so short that it cannot sensibly be used in extracts. Its application still calls for an assessment of the circumstances and the balance of rights.

The other Romanian restriction produced a different result. It barred any direct or indirect commercial or economic benefit from the reproduction. The CJEU rejected that as a general condition: the Directive does not impose it, and news organisations normally carry out economic activity to sustain their reporting. A newspaper’s commercial activity alone does not prevent it from relying on the EU news reporting exception; equally, it does not give it unlimited permission to copy works.

What does this mean for creators and publishers in Argentina?

The European judgment is useful when thinking about digital content, but it does not apply directly in Argentina. Argentine Copyright Law 11,723 includes writings of every nature and length among potentially protected works. It protects the expression of ideas and gives authors, among other rights, control over reproduction. Neither brevity nor publication on Facebook automatically excludes protection under Argentine law. The text’s originality and the circumstances of its use must be assessed in each case.

The EU exception cannot simply be imported into Argentine law. Section 10 of Law 11,723 governs certain uses for educational or scientific purposes, comments, criticism or notes, and requires the use to be limited to indispensable portions, subject to its conditions. Its reference to one thousand words is not a general licence to copy entire social media posts. Acknowledging the author and source matters, but attribution alone does not replace permission when permission is legally required.

For example, suppose an agency wants to report that a designer published an original 15-line manifesto about her work. It could describe the news in its own words, link to the post, and assess whether a short quotation is necessary for its commentary. Copying all 15 lines on the agency’s own website raises a different question: is there a licence, permission or applicable exception? The fact that the agency’s website carries advertising does not settle the matter either way.

The same caution helps distinguish different forms of online use. Copying the full text onto your own server does not pose precisely the same issues as linking to it or displaying content from its original platform. Our article on embedding and copyright discusses that distinction. Our analysis of upcycling and the reuse of protected works explains why changing or reusing someone else’s content also calls for a rights review.

What should you do before republishing someone else’s post?

First, ask whether you genuinely need the entire text to report the story, or whether you can summarise the event and link to the source. Second, identify the author, the original publication and any platform terms or licence. Third, if the post contains clearly original expression and you want to reproduce a substantial part of it, seek permission or obtain legal advice on whether a specific exception applies. Keep a record of the permission and the version you publish.

If you created the text and found a copy, preserve dated screenshots, URLs and context. Check how much was reproduced and whether you were credited. You can then consider a takedown request, a licence negotiation or a claim, depending on the facts. Our intellectual property practice for creators and businesses helps clients make those decisions, from protecting a work to addressing third-party use.

Frequently asked questions

Is every social media post protected by copyright? No. Posting online does not prevent protection, but the text must satisfy the relevant originality standard. Facts and ideas alone are not owned through copyright.

Can I copy a post if I name its author? Attribution is important, but it does not, by itself, authorise reproduction of the full text.

Can a newspaper publish the entire post because it is news? In the EU, the informatory purpose, the proportion used and the applicable national exception must be assessed. In Argentina, the analysis depends on Law 11,723 and the particular facts.

Does Gândul Media bind Argentine courts? No. It is European case law that may offer comparative reasoning. An Argentine dispute is decided under Argentine law and the facts established in the case.

Leer este artículo en español.

Argentina’s Employment Assistance Fund —Fondo de Asistencia Laboral, or FAL— is a pooled account held for each employer to help finance specified amounts due when employment relationships end. It does not reduce the employee’s legal entitlement, and it does not release the employer when the account balance is insufficient. The system was created by Law 27,802 and regulated in general terms by Decree 408/2026. CNV General Resolution 1167/2026 now supplies the detailed financial framework for the investment vehicles that will hold and manage the funds.

What is the FAL, and what does not change?

Argentina’s Employment Modernisation Law 27,802 requires each covered private-sector employer to maintain an individual account within a fund managed by a CNV-authorised entity. Legally, the account is a separate pool of assets dedicated to a specific purpose. It is independent from the manager’s own assets, may not be freely transferred, and is protected against attachment for unrelated debts.

The account belongs to the employer but is not divided into separate balances for each employee. A company with ten employees has one common FAL account that may be used, when the statutory conditions are met, to help pay obligations arising from the termination of any of those employment relationships.

The system is a financing mechanism, not a cap on liability. If an employer owes ARS 10 million and only ARS 4 million is available in the FAL account, the employer remains responsible for the remaining ARS 6 million. Spanish-speaking readers who want a broader introduction can consult our general guide to the FAL system.

What has the CNV now regulated?

The September resolution defines the architecture of the collective investment products that will operate within the FAL system, known as PIC FAL. They may be organised as special open-ended investment funds or as financial trusts. A vehicle may be created for one employer, for a group of related companies, or for multiple unrelated employers.

How will the ID FAL work?

The ID FAL is the unique identifier connecting a business with its selected investment vehicle. The authorised manager must provide that identifier together with the fund’s bank-account details. It must also report employer registrations and removals to the CNV and retain evidence that the employer actually chose the vehicle.

Managers must report participating CUIT numbers —the tax identifier used by Argentine businesses— to the CNV by 5:00 p.m. on the tenth day of each month, or the next business day when appropriate. The CNV then forwards the information to ARCA, Argentina’s Federal Revenue and Customs Control Agency. Contributions for employers reported after the cut-off will be allocated in the following applicable monthly cycle. Employers should therefore avoid leaving the selection process until the last minute.

If two managers report the same CUIT, the CNV will request supporting records and assign the employer to the manager that most recently completed the contractual relationship. If neither manager provides the requested information, the most recently reported vehicle prevails. A dated engagement record and confirmation of the ID FAL are therefore operational safeguards, not mere paperwork.

What if the employer does not select a fund?

Failure to choose does not keep a company outside the regime. When ARCA reports that an employer has no valid ID FAL, the CNV may automatically allocate the company to a vehicle that has agreed to receive such assignments. Eligible vehicles will receive allocations according to their order of creation.

The assigned manager must open the account within five business days without requiring an additional expression of consent from the employer. The company may later move the assets elsewhere. In particular, the ordinary six-month minimum between transfers does not apply when the original placement resulted from automatic allocation.

How may the money be invested, and what may it cost?

The assets do not remain idle. They are invested under the policies authorised for PIC FAL vehicles, subject to diversification, liquidity and conflict-of-interest controls. The resolution prohibits pledges or other security interests over the assets and restricts investments that finance participating employers, subject to narrow exceptions capped at ten per cent.

Managers cannot charge unlimited fees. The annual one per cent cap is comprehensive and includes the ordinary fees, professional charges and expenses needed to structure and operate the vehicle, including VAT when applicable. Certain transaction costs, CNV supervisory charges and extraordinary expenses fall outside the cap. An employer comparing vehicles should therefore review not only the headline fee, but also the investment policy, liquidity, risk and treatment of excluded costs.

How does portability work?

An employer may request a transfer to another PIC FAL, whether managed by the same authorised entity or a different one, provided the receiving vehicle accepts the transfer. The assets, records and relevant operational information must be transferred within ten business days after the request. Pending employment-related payments must be resolved before the transfer is completed.

Transfers between different managers may generally take place in June or December and no more than once every six months. The vehicle documents may require advance notice, but no more than thirty calendar days. The six-month restriction does not apply to an employer initially placed through automatic allocation.

Which employment obligations may the FAL cover?

Law 27,802 permits the account to finance a broad list of amounts connected with termination, including statutory severance, notice pay, payment in lieu for the balance of the termination month, and specified amounts arising from disability, mutual termination, force majeure, death of the employee and other situations expressly listed in section 58.

Coverage requires the employment relationship to have been registered for at least twelve months before termination. The fund also has an initial waiting period of six monthly contribution periods. If the employment was inaccurately registered, the account may only be used on the basis of the information actually reported. Unregistered employees are not covered by the FAL.

Workers covered by the construction-industry regime under Law 22,250 and private-household employees under Law 26,844 are excluded because those sectors have separate statutory arrangements.

How much does an Argentine SME contribute?

Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises that qualify under Argentina’s MiPyME framework contribute 2.5% of the remuneration used to calculate employer contributions to the Integrated Pension System (SIPA). The rate for large companies is 1%. Law 27,802 also provides a corresponding reduction in employer social-security contributions for covered employment relationships, except while the Employment Formalisation Incentive Regime applies.

For example, an SME with a monthly assessable payroll of ARS 9 million contributes ARS 225,000 per month. After twelve months, it will have contributed ARS 2.7 million, plus investment returns and minus applicable fees and expenses. That amount belongs to the common employer account; it is not divided into separate ARS 450,000 balances for six employees.

What should an employer review before implementation?

Foreign owners and local employers may also find our guide on hiring a first employee in Argentina useful. For ongoing support with payroll structure, employment decisions and corporate organisation, visit our Business Law services in Argentina.

Frequently asked questions

Embedding third-party content is not automatically copyright infringement, but Argentine law does not make it safe merely because the file remains on the original server. In the United States, the Fifth Circuit held in Emmerich Newspapers v. Particle Media that a linking site does not directly transmit a work when the user’s browser obtains it from the copyright owner’s authorised server. Argentina has no equivalent “server test”: the analysis would turn on the authority of the source, the embedder’s actual role, and whether its conduct amounts to reproduction, public exhibition or another exploitation of the work.

What embedding and framing mean

When a website inserts a video, social-media post, image or entire external page, its code usually instructs the user’s browser to request that content from a third-party server. The work appears within the page being visited even though the file may never be copied there. This is commonly described as embedding, inline linking or, when an external page is placed inside a visible container, framing.

The distinction matters. If site A downloads a photograph and uploads it again, it stores and serves its own copy. If it only inserts a resource hosted by site B, the user’s browser communicates with B. The new US decision asks who displays or transmits the work in the latter scenario.

Emmerich Newspapers v. Particle Media

Emmerich publishes more than twenty-six local news outlets in the United States. It sued Particle Media, operator of the NewsBreak aggregator, because the app opened Emmerich articles in a framed view without visibly moving the user outside the NewsBreak environment. Emmerich argued that this presentation retained engagement while allowing NewsBreak interface elements and potential advertising to remain around the article.

In its August 27, 2026 opinion, the Fifth Circuit decided two legal questions on interlocutory appeal. It considered whether the server test governed infringement of the public-display right and whether a URL could constitute copyright management information under the DMCA. The court deliberately answered those narrow questions and remanded the case; it did not finally dispose of every claim asserted by Emmerich.

The server test and the Fifth Circuit’s transmit requirement

The server test originated with the Ninth Circuit’s 2007 decision in Perfect 10 v. Amazon. In simplified terms, a website does not directly display an image if it does not store and serve the relevant file from its own server. It may provide instructions that cause a browser to request the file from someone else without becoming, through that act alone, the party that possesses and serves the copy.

The Fifth Circuit rejected fixation and server location as the best statutory basis. It focused instead on the Copyright Act’s use of “transmit.” The central inquiry is where the communication that delivers the work to the user originates. Although this reasoning takes a different route, the result for a conventional authorised embed may be similar.

NewsBreak sent the browser directions, but Emmerich’s server retained the article, decided whether to respond and transmitted its own copy. The court compared the aggregator to a switchboard operator: it can connect a call, but the exchange does not occur unless the person at the other end answers.

The holding has important limits. It assumes that the transmission originates with the copyright owner or another authorised source, that the embedding site merely requests the resource and that the source retains the technological ability to accept or reject the request. It does not authorise embedding an infringing copy hosted by a third party, storing a local version, bypassing a paywall or evading anti-framing controls.

A URL may also carry copyright information

The appeal addressed a separate issue arising from an alleged period in which full copies of articles appeared under NewsBreak URLs without part of the original identifying information. The Fifth Circuit held that URLs are not categorically excluded from the DMCA definition of copyright management information. A particular URL could qualify when it clearly communicates a protected work’s title, owner or another statutory category of information.

This does not mean that every address is CMI or that shortening a URL automatically violates the DMCA. The relevant facts may include whether the domain corresponds to the copyright owner, whether the address is stable and whether it is actually conveyed as information about the protected work.

Why the US analysis cannot simply be imported into Argentina

Argentina’s Copyright Act No. 11,723 predates the internet and does not expressly distinguish hotlinking, embedding, framing and rehosting. Nor does it provide that the absence of a copy on the defendant’s server necessarily disposes of infringement. An Argentine court would have to interpret the exclusive rights, statutory exceptions, the technical conduct and the role assumed by each participant.

Open access is not necessarily a general licence to incorporate a work into any interface. Terms of use, an official embed function, technological controls, source attribution, licence scope and the commercial presentation may all matter. An official sharing tool strengthens the argument for permission; evading restrictions or appropriating the entire user experience increases risk.

Rodríguez v. Google: Argentina’s closest Supreme Court authority

In Rodríguez, María Belén v. Google, Fallos 337:1174, Argentina’s Supreme Court considered search-engine liability for results and image thumbnails. The majority described the thumbnail as performing a mere-link function: it gave users an idea of the underlying page and helped them decide whether to visit it, while the original content remained attributable to the publisher of the source page.

The analogy supports the proposition that directing a user to a work hosted by another party does not always amount to publishing it as one’s own. But the case involved reputation and image rights, not the framing of complete newspaper articles under section 2 of Act No. 11,723. Justices Lorenzetti and Maqueda also dissented in part, reasoning that reduced copies of photographs required consent under section 31. The decision provides principles on intermediary liability and knowledge, not a technical safe harbour for every embed.

Taringa and Cuevana illustrate opposite ends of the spectrum

In 2018, Federal Oral Criminal Court No. 26 acquitted the operators of Taringa in a prosecution involving links posted by users to files hosted on other platforms. The full Taringa judgment rejected a general prior-monitoring obligation and emphasised serious evidentiary gaps: in many instances the prosecution had not established what the linked destination contained or whether it was unlawful. It was a criminal decision about an intermediary and user posts, not a declaration that every editor-selected link or embed is lawful.

At the other end, a 2011 injunction ordered access providers to block Cuevana resources used for the unauthorised reproduction or communication of television series. The official Cuevana report concerned unauthorised sources and a platform organised to facilitate access to the works. Source authority and the platform’s participation materially change the analysis.

A practical Argentine example

A compliance checklist for embedded content

Authorised source: confirm that the file comes from the rightsholder, a licensee or an authorised platform. An embed does not cure an infringing source.

Technical flow: document whether the browser retrieves the resource directly or whether your system downloads, caches, modifies or retransmits it.

Permissions and controls: review terms of use, official embed tools, licence scope and any anti-framing, anti-hotlinking or authenticated-access measures.

Presentation: preserve attribution and provenance. Avoid an interface that represents the content as your own or suggests a nonexistent affiliation.

Complaints: identify the exact URL, preserve technical records and assess notices promptly. Our analysis of copyright, ownership and transformed products explains why ownership of a physical or technical layer does not automatically transfer every right in the underlying work.

For digital products, aggregators and AI systems, technical architecture is part of the legal analysis. Our guide to Creative Commons permissions and technological restrictions provides another example of why the licence and the implementation must be read together. Through our intellectual property and technology practice, we review these layers before launch and when a dispute arises.

Frequently asked questions

Is embedding the same as copying? Not necessarily. In a conventional embed, the file remains on the source server and the browser requests it there. Permission and presentation still matter.

Can I embed anything that is publicly accessible? There is no general rule guaranteeing that result. Public access, a reuse licence and permission to embed are different questions.

Does Argentina have a server test? No. Argentina has cases on links, search engines and intermediaries, but no rule making liability turn exclusively on the server that hosts the copy.

What changes if I store the file on my server? Risk increases materially because the site is no longer only directing a browser to a source; it is reproducing and serving another copy from its own infrastructure.

Upcycling is not automatically lawful merely because it is sustainable. Reselling the same genuine item is generally protected by the exhaustion or first-sale principle. But reproducing protected artwork, materially altering a branded product or using another company’s logo as the selling point of a new item may require permission. The answer depends on what you bought, what you changed and how you market the result.

A circular economy does not eliminate intellectual property rights

The circular economy seeks to extend the useful life of products, reduce waste and limit the unnecessary use of new raw materials. Its practices include repair, resale, recycling and upcycling: transforming an existing object or material into something with a new or higher use or value.

Those activities may share an environmental purpose, but they are not legally identical. Selling an unchanged second-hand jacket is different from cutting out its printed artwork to make handbags, removing branded buttons to produce jewelry or copying its pattern across a new collection.

The dividing line is often between circulating the same lawful copy and commercially exploiting the intellectual elements embodied in it again. Copyright, trademark and industrial design rights may all become relevant when the project involves reproduction, adaptation, substantial alteration or use of another brand’s reputation.

Exhaustion: why you can advertise and resell a used product

If you lawfully purchased a genuine product that the trademark owner—or someone acting with its consent—placed on the market, you may generally resell that same item without asking the manufacturer for fresh permission. This is the exhaustion of rights, also known as the first-sale doctrine: the owner has already exercised its right to market that particular unit and cannot control every later transfer indefinitely.

The World Intellectual Property Organization explains that exhaustion allows genuine goods to circulate after their first sale. That principle supports legitimate markets for used books, clothing, phones, furniture, vehicles and collectibles. It covers resale, lending or transfer of that copy; it does not grant a license to manufacture duplicates or attach the trademark to newly made goods.

You may also advertise the product and refer to its brand when that reference truthfully identifies what you are selling. A listing may state “used genuine X-brand jacket” and display your own photographs of that jacket. In that context the mark identifies the genuine item’s origin; it does not identify you as the manufacturer or an authorized dealer.

A careful listing should disclose the item’s real condition, use photographs you own or are allowed to use, avoid suggesting official affiliation and make any significant repair or alteration clear. Exhaustion does not authorize counterfeit sales, and it does not give you permission to copy the manufacturer’s advertising photographs.

What copyright protects in a reused product

Argentina’s Copyright Act 11,723 protects drawings, photographs, sculptures, engravings, models and works of art applied to commerce or industry, among other creations. It also gives the copyright owner the power to reproduce, adapt, modify and authorize uses of the work.

This protection may cover an illustration printed on a shirt, a photograph reproduced on a bag, an original embroidered work, a sculptural feature incorporated into an object or a sufficiently original artistic design. Copyright does not protect the abstract idea of “making a bag from recovered fabric”; it protects the particular expression created by someone else.

Ownership of the material object is not the same as ownership of copyright. Section 54 of Act 11,723 states that the sale of a painting, sculpture, photograph or analogous work does not, unless otherwise agreed, include the reproduction right. You may own a painting and still lack permission to print its image on one hundred shirts.

Copyright risk increases when an upcycling business copies a work to manufacture additional units, isolates a protected image and makes it the focus of a different product, creates an unauthorized adaptation or builds a commercial collection around that expression. Argentine law does not contain a general exception authorizing commercial transformation simply because the activity reduces waste.

The Chanel case: an authentic button did not make the new product authorized

The tension became visible in Chanel SAS v. Kamad Reworked, decided by the Paris Judicial Court. Kamad produced necklaces, bracelets, earrings and belt chains from genuine buttons and buckles bearing the “COCO” and “CHANEL” marks and Chanel’s interlocking-letter emblem.

According to the legal report on the decision, Kamad described each item as its own independent creation and told customers that it was not affiliated with Chanel. It also supplied certificates stating that the components came from authentic articles.

Those disclaimers were not enough. The court found that the original products had been modified and that consumers could immediately associate the new accessories with Chanel. Kamad’s own sign appeared in less visible places while the luxury marks dominated the front. Small-print disclosures did not remove that commercial link.

The decision rested mainly on trademark infringement and misleading commercial practices, not copyright. That distinction matters: an upcycling project may avoid copying a copyright work and still infringe a trademark by using the sign as the feature that attracts customers or suggests a collaboration that does not exist.

Resale, repair and transformation are different transactions

Resale generally preserves the original product. A person sells the genuine garment or accessory that they purchased, and the mark truthfully identifies the source of that same item. The seller must still avoid false claims about authenticity, condition, warranty or affiliation.

Repair seeks to restore the object’s functionality. Replacing a broken zipper or restoring a piece of furniture is usually closer to preserving the product than creating a new one. The analysis changes if the work alters a protected creation, replaces distinctive elements or is advertised as an official service when it is not.

Commercial transformation takes parts of the original object and incorporates them into something different. The business is no longer offering only the unit that entered the market: it is offering a new product, a new presentation and often a new commercial use of the original logo, artwork or design.

European law illustrates the distinction. A first authorized sale may exhaust control over resale of that copy, but it does not automatically authorize reproduction or remove legitimate reasons to oppose commercialization of an altered product. Directive 2001/29 expressly separates the reproduction right from the distribution right that may be exhausted after the first sale.

Copyright, trademarks and designs may overlap

A single product may contain several layers of protection. Copyright may protect the illustration; Argentina’s Trademark Act 22,362 may protect the name and logo; and industrial design law may protect a novel product appearance.

Those layers operate independently. A shape that does not qualify for copyright protection may still be covered by a registered industrial design. Likewise, the fact that recovered material is genuine does not allow the upcycler to present a transformed item as though it came from the trademark owner.

Design protection is not permanent or automatic in every system. The European dispute over the invalidation of the Crocs design (in Spanish) shows why a business should identify the specific right, its owner and its current status before building a collection around someone else’s products.

A practical example in Argentina

Imagine a business in Córdoba that buys used garments, cuts out areas containing original illustrations and places them on the front of newly manufactured backpacks. Each backpack also carries the upcycler’s own label and states that there is no connection with the garment brand.

The label helps identify the new manufacturer, but it does not settle every issue. The business would need to determine whether the illustration is protected, whether the transformation is an unauthorized adaptation or exploitation, whether another company’s trademark remains visible, whether that mark drives the sale and whether the overall marketing creates confusion. It should also document the lawful origin of the materials and secure appropriate rights from the designers of the new products.

If the business instead uses unbranded plain textiles, creates original patterns and keeps purchase records, its risk is considerably lower. Sustainable design works best when legal design is built into the product from the beginning.

How to reduce legal risk in an upcycling project

Frequently asked questions

Can I list and sell a used branded item? Yes, in general, when you are reselling the same genuine item you acquired lawfully. Describe it accurately, use your own photographs and do not imply official affiliation.

Can I show the brand and logo in the listing? Yes, when they identify the genuine item being sold. That descriptive use does not permit you to attach the mark to a newly made product or use it as your own business identity.

Does a “not affiliated” disclaimer solve the problem? Not by itself. Courts examine the entire presentation: the prominence of each mark, photographs, price, sales channel, alterations and the likely perception of customers.

Is there a sustainability exception for commercial upcycling? Argentine intellectual property law does not provide a general exception for commercial upcycling. Each project must be assessed according to the rights involved and the transformation performed.