Unfair Competition in Iran: Articles 129–130 Explained
by Sadegh Shamshiri
In short: Iran prohibits unfair competition under Articles 129 and 130 of the Industrial Property Protection Law (2024). The law catches dishonest market conduct — false statements about rivals, imitation of a competitor’s trade dress, misleading or deceptive advertising, and price collusion aimed at driving competitors out. It reaches behaviour that ordinary trademark or patent infringement does not. Article 130 imports the remedies of Article 73, so a victim can seek seizure of the offending goods, an injunction against their manufacture, sale, or import, and enforcement at customs.
What counts as unfair competition under Iranian law?
Unfair competition is dishonest commercial conduct that distorts a fair market. It is broader than infringement of a registered right. You can infringe nobody’s trademark and still compete unfairly — by lying about a rival, copying the look of their packaging, advertising falsely, or colluding on price to squeeze competitors out.
The rules sit in Chapter 6 of Iran’s Industrial Property Protection Law (2024) and align with Article 10bis of the Paris Convention, the international benchmark for honest commercial practice. Iran has no standalone “passing off” doctrine of the kind found in common-law systems; instead, conduct of that sort is handled through these unfair-competition provisions.
This matters in practice. A business harmed by a competitor’s dirty tactics does not need a registered trademark or patent to act. The wrong is the conduct, not the breach of a registration.
The legal framework
Two articles do the work, and a third supplies the teeth:
- Article 129 defines the six acts that count as unfair competition.
- Article 130 states that the remedies in Article 73 apply to these acts, mutatis mutandis.
- Article 73 sets out those remedies — provisional seizure, injunction, and customs enforcement.
The six prohibited acts, with examples
| # | Prohibited act | In plain terms | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | False representation against a competitor | Lying to damage a rival’s reputation | Falsely claiming a competitor’s product failed safety testing |
| 2 | Creating confusing similarity | Copying a rival’s look so buyers are misled | Imitating a competitor’s distinctive packaging shape and colour |
| 3 | False or misleading advertising | Misstating what a product is or does | Labelling goods “Made in Germany” when they are not |
| 4 | Misleading comparative advertising | Running down a named rival with false comparisons | An ad falsely claiming a rival’s product is unsafe or inferior |
| 5 | Failing to distinguish a sub-standard licensed product | Selling under a licence without flagging lower quality | A licensee marketing inferior goods as if identical to the original |
| 6 | Price collusion to eliminate competitors | Concerted pricing to force rivals out | A cartel agreeing to fix or slash prices to bankrupt a smaller player |
1. False representation against a competitor
Any false statement that discredits or diminishes public confidence in a competitor’s business, goods, or activities is unfair competition. The classic case is a whispering campaign: telling buyers that a rival’s product is defective or unsafe when it is not.
2. Creating confusing similarity
Conduct that makes your goods or services resemble a competitor’s, in a way likely to confuse consumers, is prohibited. This is the trade-dress problem — copying the distinctive packaging, get-up, or presentation so that a shopper reaches for your product believing it is the rival’s.
3. False or misleading advertising
Advertising that creates a false impression about a product’s nature or quality is caught — its composition, shelf life, origin, method of manufacture, quantity, or fitness for use. A false “Made in Germany” claim, or a supplement advertised as a cure it is not, falls here.
4. Misleading comparative advertising
Comparative advertising is not banned, but it becomes unfair when it harms a competitor’s reputation or goodwill through misleading comparisons. Naming a rival and falsely claiming your product outperforms theirs crosses the line.
5. Failure to distinguish a sub-standard licensed product
Where a product is sold under a licence to exploit but lacks the quality of the original, advertising that does not distinguish the two is unfair. The rule stops a licensee from trading on the original’s reputation while delivering less.
6. Price collusion to eliminate competitors
Any collusion or concerted practice to raise or lower prices for the purpose of eliminating competitors is prohibited. This is the cartel and predatory-pricing problem: coordinated pricing designed not to serve customers but to drive rivals out of the market.
The expert-opinion safe harbour
Article 129 carries an important exception. An expert opinion issued by a competent specialised authority, acting within its statutory jurisdiction, about goods or services does not count as unfair competition. A standards body or accredited laboratory publishing an honest test result is protected, even if the result reflects badly on a product.
Remedies and enforcement
Through Article 130, the remedies of Article 73 apply to unfair competition. At any stage of civil or criminal proceedings, a claimant may ask the court for:
- Provisional attachment and seizure of the offending products;
- An injunction prohibiting their manufacture, sale, or import;
- Customs enforcement — where the goods sit in customs, customs officers or law-enforcement officials carry out the order.
Requests are handled under Iran’s Code of Civil Procedure for Public and Revolutionary Courts (2000). The practical effect is that a business does not have to wait for a final judgment to stop the harm; it can seek to freeze the conduct early.
How this differs from trademark infringement
Trademark infringement asks one question: did the defendant use a sign confusingly similar to a registered mark? Unfair competition is wider. It reaches false statements, deceptive advertising, trade-dress copying, and price collusion — conduct that may involve no registered right at all. For a business with weak or pending registrations, the unfair-competition route can be the stronger claim.
Practical guidance
If you compete in Iran, keep advertising truthful and substantiated, avoid imitating a rival’s get-up, and steer clear of any pricing arrangement aimed at a competitor rather than the customer.
If you are the victim, document the conduct, preserve the offending advertising or packaging, and move quickly — the Article 73 remedies are designed for early intervention, and customs enforcement is most effective before goods clear.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is unfair competition under Iranian law? Dishonest commercial conduct that distorts fair competition — false statements about rivals, trade-dress imitation, misleading advertising, and price collusion. It is defined in Article 129 of the Industrial Property Protection Law (2024) and is broader than trademark or patent infringement.
Which law governs unfair competition in Iran? Articles 129 and 130 of the Industrial Property Protection Law (2024), within Chapter 6, which aligns with Article 10bis of the Paris Convention.
Do I need a registered trademark to bring an unfair-competition claim? No. Unfair competition targets the conduct, not the breach of a registration, so a claim can succeed without a registered right.
Is comparative advertising illegal in Iran? Not in itself. It becomes unfair only when it misleads and harms the reputation or goodwill of a named competitor.
What remedies are available for unfair competition? Through Article 130, the Article 73 remedies apply: provisional seizure of the offending goods, an injunction against their manufacture, sale, or import, and customs enforcement.
Is price-fixing unfair competition in Iran? Yes, where parties collude to raise or lower prices for the purpose of eliminating competitors.
Does an unfavourable expert report count as unfair competition? No. An opinion from a competent specialised authority acting within its jurisdiction is expressly protected.
Does Iran recognise passing off? Not as a separate doctrine. Conduct of that kind is addressed through the unfair-competition provisions instead.
Statutory text (reference)
Article 129 — Acts of unfair competition. The following constitute unfair competition: (1) any false representation against a competitor that discredits, diminishes, or damages public confidence in that competitor’s business, goods, or activities; (2) any act creating confusing similarity between one’s own goods or services and a competitor’s, where likely to mislead consumers; (3) false or misleading advertising, or any presentation that misleads the public as to the nature or quality of products, including composition, validity period, origin, method of manufacture, quantity, or fitness for use; (4) misleading comparative advertising that harms a competitor’s reputation or goodwill; (5) advertising that fails to distinguish an original product from a licensed product that lacks the original’s quality or standard; (6) any collusion or concerted practice to raise or lower prices for the purpose of eliminating competitors. Note: an expert opinion issued by a competent specialised authority within its statutory jurisdiction does not constitute unfair competition.
Article 130. Article 73 applies, mutatis mutandis, to acts of unfair competition.
Article 73. At any stage of civil or criminal proceedings, the complainant may request provisional attachment and seizure of infringing products and an injunction prohibiting their manufacture, sale, or import. Where the goods are in customs, customs officers or law-enforcement officials execute the order. Note: such requests are considered under the Code of Civil Procedure for Public and Revolutionary Courts (2000).
[/fusion_text][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]
Sadegh Shamshiri
Sadegh leads on legal strategy and represents high-profile clients in IP litigation and enforcement — across trademarks, patents, designs, copyright, and domain names, including complex multi-jurisdictional disputes.