This week, we are considering the vital role that IP contributes to business success and how to navigate a global brand and put this into practice. Irina Lyapis, Director of Trademark and Brand at Atlassian and Murray Taylor, General Counsel of Uncommon Creative Studio have shared their insights from working in global companies.

Aligning IP with the business

In our experience, successful legal teams take a broad, strategic approach to IP, rather than simply focusing on the daily tasks. The C-suite is rarely interested in filing statistics or opposition outcomes in isolation; what resonates is a clear narrative linking IP to commercial value. For example, whether that is protecting a product launch, de-risking market entry, or safeguarding licensing revenue. That shift in reporting language is often the single most impactful change an IP team can make.

Irina Lyapis echoes this perspective. In her view, “IP strategy and commercial objectives are two sides of the same coin; they are not sequential steps, but parallel forces that must move in lockstep to be effective”.

Alignment requires internal legal teams to develop deep, high-trust relationships with key stakeholders across the business, and to transition their roles from being a reactive legal executor to a proactive business advisor. Murray Taylor explains that getting senior management onside requires a simple message: “a strong, well-maintained portfolio can sit on the balance sheet and directly enhance the value of the business, whether in the context of investment, acquisition, or day-to-day commercial operations”. But beyond internal alignment, an IP strategist must zoom out to analyse broader market dynamics and industry trends. This allows strategic long-term decisions to be made across all relevant markets.

Murray Taylor describes a similar evolution at Uncommon. Having expanded from a UK base into the US, his team has shifted from simply being reactive to being proactive to allow for smooth business expansions over the next five years. He explains that “we now take a forward-looking approach, actively monitoring and filing in territories where we anticipate operating… this distinction matters when thinking about short-term versus long-term objectives. In the short term, IP strategy is often driven by immediate commercial activity (protecting a product launch or looking for conflicts before release). Over the longer term, however, brand protection requires us to think ahead of the business, not just alongside it”. This succinctly summarises the tensions we see when advising international businesses eyeing expansion. Lyapis explains that while every company is focused on growth, the successful short-term launches provide the commercial fuel for long-term brand equity. When a product succeeds, the short-term IP work becomes the foundation for long-term protection.

But not every experiment works. In a high-growth environment, the challenge is to cast a wide enough net to protect the company's current activities without over-rotating on niche projects. Lyapis explains that “if we over-invest resources into every experimental feature or pilot program, we risk creating a fragmented portfolio that is difficult (and expensive) to maintain and defend”.

For businesses, an effective strategy ensures that there is a prioritised focus. Lyapis sums this up by explaining that “while we must be agile enough to support innovation, the priority should always remain on the core products and services” that define the brand's identity. This will provide the business with a secure home base from which it can safely explore new commercial horizons.

Strategic trade-offs in a global portfolio

One of the most complex challenges facing any multinational brand owner is how to allocate finite resources across jurisdictions with different legal frameworks, enforcement cultures, and commercial significance. Filing, enforcement, and licensing decisions across the UK, the EU, the US, China, and beyond, each require a flexible approach. As Lyapis puts it, there is no "one size fits all" strategy. Every industry has a unique pulse, and even within the same industry, companies must calibrate their strategy based on specific drivers like customer demographics and revenue models. A sophisticated portfolio strategy begins with a fundamental understanding of your business and its specific nuances. Taylor illustrates this well: pre-Brexit, the EU trade mark system offered broad territorial coverage, but the UK's departure and use-based filing requirements in the US mean that each market now demands its own strategic focus. He also stresses the importance of actively monitoring for encroachment by third parties whose registrations could narrow the distinctiveness of existing rights.

It is also essential to distinguish between theoretical hurdles and practical threats. A register conflict, which is a theoretical obstacle to a certificate, is very different from a litigation or regulatory risk, which is a practical obstacle to commercial operation. The central question in Lyapis’s mind must always be: "If we lost rights in this country tomorrow, or if we were forced to rebrand, what is the magnitude of the disruption?" If the answer is negligible, it might not make sense to pour significant resources into that jurisdiction. If the impact would be fundamental, that is where resources must be concentrated.

Global strategies require adaption to regulatory environments, constantly shifting due to geopolitics and economic challenges, whilst being agile enough to pivot when the business requires.

AI and the strategic portfolio

AI-powered monitoring, clearance, and risk detection tools are enabling IP teams to identify portfolio redundancies and risk concentrations far more quickly than traditional audit cycles. Yet adoption is not uniform. Taylor proposes pragmatism: he places significant value on external counsel's judgment and remains cautious about adopting AI-driven processes without a clear understanding of their accuracy and accountability. The priority, he says, is to adopt technology where it genuinely enhances strategy, not for its own sake.

While there are numerous suppliers of AI-powered tools, there is varying take up across our global clients in adopting AI to support IP management. AI shows great promise in simplifying workflows, improving productivity, and analysing data, but for the time being, strategy is based on experience, understanding of a business, and to a degree, instinct.

Lessons from the courtroom

Strategy is often forged in dispute. Some of the most valuable insights we see IP leaders carry forward come not from portfolio planning exercises but from the pressures of litigation, where theory meets reality. Lyapis agrees. Her perspective has been a gradual evolution through her career where she has learnt the most in litigation. She explains that “litigation gives you the rare space to be a true architect, building a strategy from the ground up and developing theories that didn't exist until you saw the connection. It is deeply strategic, but also a creative exercise in framing ‘the truth’”.

This resonates with our experience in conducting global litigation, which we summarise together with Lyapis’s thoughts:

1. Look beyond the initial dispute. Consider what the main legal or commercial drivers are to a dispute. A business’s leverage may not always be in the country where litigation is being pursued, so reviewing a portfolio globally often reveals a jurisdiction where a superior position could force a favourable settlement elsewhere. Avoid the silos between different areas of an IP portfolio.
2. Utilise social media. Digital footprints often contradict legal postures, and reveal how a brand lives in the wild, which can inform how the courtroom fight may unfold. Social media is an underutilised goldmine for legal intelligence.
3. Lean into the challenges. Don’t hide from the flaws but embrace them and weave them into a larger, more human narrative. Litigation, at its core, is storytelling, backed up by persuasive evidence. The most cohesive and transparent story, where the Judge can understand the evidence presented, usually wins the room.

These are themes that will resonate well beyond a single company or sector. As Taylor observes, a well-maintained trade mark portfolio is not merely a bundle of legal rights but a business asset that can sit on the balance sheet and directly enhance company value, whether in the context of investment, acquisition, or day-to-day operations. As IP continues its migration from cost centre to strategic function, the leaders who thrive will be those who can translate portfolio decisions into the language of commercial risk and opportunity, and who are prepared to learn as much from their setbacks as from their successes.

If your business is looking to strategically expand across borders, we can help. Please do get in touch with Stephanie Kay on stephanie.kay@lewissilkin.com.