Entain Presses IPO Over Unlicensed Gambling Trade Marks
Entain has formally asked the UK Intellectual Property Office to review its trade mark approval process after the operator found that unlicensed gambling brands can still access the UK trade mark register and use it to build credibility with British consumers.
In a letter to IPO chief executive and comptroller-general Adam Williams, Entain group general counsel Simon Zinger said the current system allows operators to “acquire the commercial legitimacy that registration confers” while running activity that constitutes a criminal offence under section 33 of the Gambling Act 2005. Entain reviewed 18 gambling brands it believed were targeting UK players and found 14 held no valid Gambling Commission operating licence. According to SBC News, several of the brands listed by Entain are registered in Curaçao or Anjouan, and one brand has alleged Russian links.
The Anjouan point carries weight. The island regulator recently stated that its licences are not presented as “global and universal.” That matters because Anjouan registration does not replace the UK licence required to serve British consumers.
What Entain Is Asking For
Entain’s proposals focus on licence checks and public policy grounds. Zinger put forward two main IPO-facing routes: a requirement for gambling trade mark applicants to provide proof of a valid Gambling Commission licence before registration, and a test of whether public policy provisions in the Trade Marks Act 1994 could apply to applicants whose intended commercial activity is illegal under gambling law.
The letter also drew a parallel with Companies House, where restricted company names such as those containing “bank” or “insurance” require prior approval from the relevant regulator. Zinger argued a structurally identical mechanism could apply to gambling trade marks, with the IPO verifying licence numbers against the Gambling Commission’s public register.
In a separate letter, Entain contacted the Gambling Commission to request a programme of proactive objections during the two-month publication window for trade mark applications.
IPO: Current Law Does Not Reach That Far
Williams replied on 2 June. He confirmed the IPO had passed Entain’s concerns to colleagues responsible for trade mark policy and that officials would arrange a meeting. At the same time, he outlined the limits of the current legal framework.
“The assessment of whether a mark is contrary to public policy, or whether its registration is prohibited in law, relates to the intrinsic properties of the mark itself,” Williams wrote. “This does not involve an assessment of the actions of the applicant or how the mark is used.”
Williams also confirmed there is no trade mark equivalent of the Companies House restricted-name system. On the Russian links point, he noted that UK sanctions already extend to intellectual property rights and that the IPO does not accept fees or provide services to those on the UK sanctions list.
Beth Williams, Entain’s Group Head of IP, said the company wants the IPO to “take a look at the way they review applications,” specifically whether it can consider the owner of the mark or its intended use, not just the mark itself.
A Campaign in a Shifting Regulatory Moment
The trade mark push forms part of Entain’s broader anti-black-market campaign. The company has already written to the Premier League and the Independent Football Regulator about unlicensed operators that gain visibility through sports sponsorship. Ladbrokes, one of Entain’s core brands, is a Liverpool FC partner, and Entain is calling on other Premier League clubs to work only with licensed operators.
Andrew Rhodes left the Gambling Commission CEO post in late April and a permanent replacement has not been named. The DCMS has appointed Emma Floyd as Director of Sport and Gambling, though she is new to the sector. Both gaps leave Entain in a position where it advances this agenda without a settled counterpart at either regulator.
💡TGJ Take
The IPO’s response confirms that closing this gap will require either primary legislation or a policy shift at the Gambling Commission, and neither outcome arrives quickly. For licensed operators, the problem is concrete: UKGC compliance carries real cost, yet some offshore brands access the same UK legal infrastructure to appear credible. Affiliates that send UK traffic to unlicensed brands should treat a UK trade mark as a warning sign rather than a reassurance, because the mark does not confirm what it appears to confirm. With no permanent Gambling Commission CEO in post, Entain advances this campaign into a leadership gap. The next test is whether DCMS or the Gambling Commission converts that pressure into a formal policy process.
