From the 2007 Industrial Property Code to the new round of comprehensive reform implemented in 2025, Cape Verde's legal system has undergone a profound transformation that goes far beyond piecemeal adjustments. The legislature pursued a broader reform that deeply reflects the country's evolving economic landscape and its process of deeper, more comprehensive integration into the global intellectual property landscape. The core issue of the current policy agenda is no longer simply updating obsolete policy provisions, but comprehensively responding to the new demands and challenges brought about by the wave of digitalization, interconnected market environments, and the knowledge-driven economy.

Although the 2007 Code indeed took an important step in bringing domestic legal norms closer to international standards, the 2025 Code undoubtedly goes much further by thoroughly restructuring the entire industrial property protection system to address new technological and economic realities. Although the previous version of the Code systematically covered the main traditional categories in the field of industrial property, specifically including patents for invention, utility models, registered trademarks, industrial designs, commercial trade names, and geographical indications, its core objective was to align the domestic legal framework with the requirements of global trade development and the trends of technological progress. However, it is undeniable that the 2007 Code remained largely constrained by a relatively traditional procedural model, and failed to adequately and effectively address the protection of new types of intangible assets in its institutional design, nor did it propose new legal protection strategies adapted to the needs of the times.

In sharp contrast, the 2025 Code provides a broader scope and more substantive protection. It explicitly attempts to fill various gaps left by the old system, achieving this objective by systematically addressing a series of important topics such as unregistered designs, plant varieties, traditional knowledge, trade secrets, and non-traditional signs. By adopting such legislative measures, the new Code more clearly reflects the legislature's profound understanding of and institutional response to the economic value of innovation results, the unique value of cultural identifiers, and the core value of intangible assets in today's market environment.

The proactive response of the new Code to technological change is another significant hallmark of this evolutionary process. By formally accepting electronic filing methods and granting full legal status to electronic signatures with legal effect, the new legal framework represents a tangible step forward for Cape Verde in the direction of the digitalization of administrative procedures. This is by no means a purely technological advancement; it is also an effective means and method to reduce economic costs for all parties, accelerate the speed of case processing and examination, enhance public accessibility to the entire industrial property administration system, and improve the overall operational efficiency of the system.

A comprehensive understanding of this reform must also be combined with a series of important developments that occurred in 2022. It was in 2022 that Cape Verde officially formulated and adopted a national intellectual property strategic orientation, and simultaneously acceded to a series of highly influential international intellectual property treaties and instruments. These important strategic initiatives effectively strengthened the depth and breadth of the country's integration into the global intellectual property system, and laid a solid policy foundation and practical prerequisite for this more comprehensive reform embodied in the 2025 Code. From this perspective, the new Code should be reasonably regarded as the inevitable final outcome on a legal level of a broader and more profound national policy transformation that was initiated at the beginning of this decade.

All the aforementioned developments have fully demonstrated the breadth and depth of the 2025 reform. However, when we move beyond these general policy concepts and macro considerations and instead deeply examine the specific operational legal framework established by the new Code, the full significance of these reforms becomes increasingly clear and distinct.

Regarding the protection of unregistered designs, Article 274 of the new Code introduces an automatic form of protection mechanism, specifically designed to prevent others from counterfeiting unregistered designs. The validity period of this automatic protection is a total of three years, calculated from the date when the design is first publicly disclosed to the public within the territory of Cape Verde. The law explicitly stipulates that where a design has been published through publications, publicly exhibited in exhibition activities, or actually used in the course of commercial business activities, and the extent of its disclosure has reached a level sufficient to allow professionals within the circles of the relevant industry sector reasonable access and knowledge, the disclosure of the design shall be recognized as a "public disclosure" in the legal sense. Correspondingly, those designs that are independently completed by the creator and are always disclosed under conditions bound by confidentiality obligations are explicitly excluded from the scope of the aforementioned automatic protection mechanism. The purpose of this institutional arrangement is to effectively protect those designs with short market life cycles and rapid updates, enabling them to obtain necessary legal protection without undergoing formal registration application procedures, thereby playing a role in supplementing and improving the system applicable to registered designs.

Regarding the protection of plant varieties, Articles 193 to 239 of the new Code establish a specialized and distinct legal protection system. This system applies to new varieties that simultaneously meet various cumulative requirements, namely distinctness, uniformity, stability, and novelty. The application materials submitted by the applicant must be accompanied by an official variety description, a unique and clearly identifiable variety denomination, and a technical examination report issued by a professional technical institution. The protection period prescribed by law is twenty-five years, and for tree and vine plant varieties, the protection period is further extended to thirty years. The exclusive rights enjoyed by the right holder cover various business activities such as the production, reproduction, and commercial marketing of propagating material. The system simultaneously provides for several specific limitations on rights, which particularly include the farmers' privilege: namely, that farmers can retain harvested seeds for further reproduction, and the possibility of issuing compulsory licenses based on legitimate considerations of public interest. The system also ensures effective linkage and coordination with the Arusha Protocol for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants formulated under the framework of the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization, while providing for regular technical review requirements and an institutional arrangement for maintaining a publicly accessible variety registry. It is particularly noteworthy that any plant variety already protected by this specialized system is explicitly excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter in the sense of patent law.

Regarding the protection of traditional knowledge, Articles 275 to 283 of the new Code provide a broad and clear definition of traditional knowledge. Traditional knowledge is defined as a knowledge system generated, preserved, transmitted, and developed from generation to generation within various communities, which particularly includes traditional practices related to biodiversity conservation, specialized techniques in the agricultural field, traditional knowledge related to health and medical uses, and cultural expressions such as folklore narratives, traditional dance performances, and handicraft making techniques. Such traditional knowledge is explicitly recognized by law as the collective property owned by the community and automatically obtains legal recognition and protection without any registration requirements. The new Code explicitly prohibits anyone from using such traditional knowledge for patent applications, trademark registrations, or other commercial economic activities without prior informed consent from the relevant community and without proper disclosure of the source of the traditional knowledge. The competent authority, namely the National Institute of Industrial Property of Cape Verde, is authorized by law to refuse registration for any intellectual property registration application containing elements of unauthorized use of traditional knowledge. The relevant communities themselves as well as the State can act as qualified legal entities to initiate corresponding legal enforcement proceedings. The validity period of this legal protection is indefinite, and where applicable, can form a cumulative and overlapping protection effect with copyright protection. This institutional arrangement fully reflects the domestic legal transformation and implementation of the Swakopmund Protocol on the Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore, which explicitly provides for civil and criminal penalties, while also establishing an operational mechanism to ensure that holders of traditional knowledge can obtain fair and equitable remuneration.

Regarding the protection of trade secrets, Articles 407 to 409 of the new Code have been strengthened accordingly. As clearly reflected in the preamble of the Code and the provisions regarding the general system of remedies, the protection of trade secrets encompasses regulations against the unlawful acquisition, unlawful use, or unlawful disclosure of confidential information and know-how. This protection framework is organically linked with the relevant provisions of the unfair competition law, explicitly stipulating that under the premise of the existence of an express or implied obligation of confidentiality, corresponding sanctions may be imposed in accordance with the law for acts infringing upon trade secrets.

Regarding the registration of non-traditional signs, Article 284 of the new Code adopts a technologically neutral approach, explicitly recognizing that any sign capable of being represented in a clear and precise manner possesses the potential possibility of obtaining registration, and does not mandatorily require that such signs must be presented through traditional graphic representation. This particularly includes sound marks, color marks, non-functional three-dimensional shape marks, and composite marks composed of a combination of multiple elements, which can be presented through existing technical means, such as by submitting audio-visual electronic files or generating and submitting relevant data with the aid of specialized computer software. For signs that lack inherent distinctiveness or whose method of use may produce a misleading effect on the public, the registration application shall be rejected.

The enforcement mechanism constitutes another core innovation of this reform. Articles 468 to 500 of the 2025 Code significantly strengthen the penalty system applicable to infringement acts and unfair competition, introducing more precise and actionable provisions regarding the calculation and determination of damages, the types and applicable conditions of injunctive relief, and the prosecution of criminal liability. This series of institutional improvements stands in sharp contrast to the relatively imperfect state of remedies in the old 2007 Code, under which the means and effects of remedies in practice were relatively weak. By prioritizing effective judicial and administrative enforcement, this reform ensures that various intellectual property rights can be transformed from abstract rights on paper into legal protections in reality with actual deterrence and enforceability, thereby effectively curbing counterfeiting and imitation acts, and significantly enhancing investor confidence in Cape Verde's domestic market.

Examining all the aforementioned institutional elements as a whole, we can clearly see that the new 2025 Code is by no means limited to a simple update of terminology or pure procedural improvement. On the contrary, it endeavors to establish a comprehensive and responsive legal framework tailored to the developmental needs of a knowledge-based economy. In such an economic form, market value is increasingly and closely linked with innovation achievements, cultural identifiers, the management capacity of confidential information, and the accessibility of digital technology. Therefore, within a coherent, unified, and internally coordinated legislative action, this reform successfully and organically combines the substantive expansion of the scope of protection entities, the great simplification and facilitation of administrative procedures, and the deep alignment and coordination with various international legal instruments.