TickTickTrader Beats TikTok in UK Trade Mark War – Lord Sugar Backs Small Business Win

The Isle of Man’s trading platform has won a two-year trading battle against the UK arm of TikTok, which the ruling small business advisers say sets a strong precedent for founders facing legal pressure from the tech giants.

In a decision that can be read by the entire SME community, a small financial trading education business recognized TikTok Information Technologies UK Limited, the British unit of ByteDance, one of the most important technology companies in the world, in a two-year trademark dispute before the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO).

TickTickTrader Ltd, an Isle of Man platform that trains budding traders, applied in April 2023 to register the trademark ‘TickTickTrader’. The term is derived from a lower trading term: a ‘tick’ is the smallest price allowed in futures trading. TikTok’s legal team, drawn from one of the world’s largest law firms, flatly opposed the request, saying the name was confusingly similar to its globally recognized brand and risked tarnishing its reputation. The accompanying cease and desist letter gave the startup 14 days to withdraw the request, drop the name and sign the pledges.

For a company with about 50 employees, the need was there. It refused.

On 19 February 2026, Hearing Officer Mrs E Fisher dismissed both grounds of TikTok’s objection in full and ordered TikTok to pay TickTickTrader’s costs. The appeal window is now closed and the decision is final.

‘Tick Tick’ is not ‘Tik Tok’

The Hearing Officer found that the two marks were only visually and aurally similar to the intermediate level, and, more importantly, not conceptually similar. When TikTok triggered the ticking clock, TickTickTrader was seized to create the image of a trader who locks positions in a certain way, profiting from increased profits. The word ‘merchant’, the executive decided, was irrelevant or merely descriptive: it formed an integral part of the overall impression of the brand.

“I find that there is no likelihood of direct or indirect confusion,” the decision said. The police also rejected TikTok’s argument that consumers will think that TickTickTrader is an extension of the product in the same family as TikTok Shop, TikTok Pay or TikTok Live, describing that logic as unconvincing. “I find that there is no connection between the marks,” he wrote.

He added that consumers of education and training services, who are generally more attentive, are less likely to confuse two brands with such clear visual, conceptual and commercial differences. TikTok’s reputation, however great, has not given it the right to dominate the market.

Big tech, small business – and the cost of standing your ground

TickTickTrader has battled opposition from Trade Mark Wizards, a London-based intellectual property firm backed by Lord Sugar, who is also a director of the company. For Trade Mark Wizards, the case is symptomatic of a wider pattern in which large companies rely on the disproportionate commercial pressure of legal processes to push smaller competitors to surrender, regardless of the benefits involved.

It’s a pattern this magazine has written about before, from Rolex demanding that children’s watch startup Devon change its name to the cease-and-desist letters being released to UK founders by global brands. As Business Matters has argued in the past in its targeting of inventors accused of trademark infringement, not all claims are legally sound, and a lawsuit without due diligence can prove too costly to prosecute.

Lord Sugar, a director at Trade Mark Wizards, said the TickTickTrader case is typical.

“I’ve been in business long enough to recognize this pattern quickly,” he said. “Big companies think they can throw their weight around and small businesses will just roll over because they can’t afford to fight. That’s not how it’s supposed to work. What’s important here is that the claim didn’t stack up – and when it was properly tested, it failed. You don’t get every word that sounds like yours just because you’re good, if you’re not a big brand, if you lose. That’s it.”

Oliver Oguz, managing director of Trade Mark Wizards, was equally straightforward. “The playbook used to be simple,” he said. “If you’re a big company and a small business mistreats you, you throw lawyers at them and wait for them to blink. That playbook is over. This decision is proof that the rules apply to everyone, no matter how many zeros in your legal budget. TikTok has all the resources in the world. They still lost because the facts didn’t support them.”

A TickTickTrader board member explained when the decision was made.

“We were effectively asked to drop our brand entirely. In a small business, that’s not just a legal issue, it’s who you are, your work, everything you’ve built. It would have been easy to leave, but we knew the name meant something and we believed we were right to keep it. Having the right support around us made the difference.”

What founders can take from the decision

For startups and SMEs watching from the sidelines, the case offers three practical lessons. First, UKIPO’s regular objection process is structured, evidence-led, and determined by law — not by the relative size of the parties. Second, protection based on the true and commercial meaning of a brand name can defeat a much larger enemy. Third, as our legal contributors have long debated pieces about product protection and IP power, independent legal advice from experts, rather than rote speech, is often the deciding factor in deciding whether a name survives.

The UKIPO has confirmed that TickTickTrader can now move forward with full trademark registration, which the company has secured in several key areas of the world. TikTok was ordered to pay £1,700 in costs. The figure is modest in terms of title, but it reflects the court’s clear view of merit, and, for the wider SME community, the mark is nothing short of remarkable.