Author: Abigail Ford

INTA 2026 brought together in-house teams, international firms and brand owners at a time when the demands on IP counsel are changing. Across the week, conversations in sessions and around the conference highlighted several themes that felt particularly relevant for both in-house lawyers and foreign attorneys managing UK matters.

As the conference came to London, our home city, we hosted a number of events and meetings throughout the week, including our run club and reception at SUSHISAMBA, which led to plenty of conversations with contacts old and new. 

Several themes came up throughout the week: AI remains at the top of everyone’s agenda, alongside the growing importance of commercial judgement, the value of strong portfolio protection and the benefit of involving IP counsel early. Together, they outline a clear picture of what clients and referring firms are looking for from external counsel. Here, we outline what they mean in practice.

1. Experience and judgement are what add most value for clients

AI and legal technology were a central theme throughout INTA, but the conversations around them were notably practical. The point raised most often was not whether firms are using technology, but how they apply judgement when technology cannot resolve the issue on its own. 
 
That is most apparent in matters where the answer or next steps are not immediately clear: a conflict search that flags a potential issue, a licensing clause that could be read two ways or an opposition where the outcome is genuinely unclear, for example. 
 
In these situations, experienced counsel can add value by providing a clear, commercially grounded recommendation rather than simply setting out possibilities. For in-house teams, that supports faster and more confident decision-making. For firms working with other firms on international matters, it helps ensure that local counsel adds practical value and protects the wider client relationship. 
 
Clients in those situations need a clear steer, not a list of possibilities, and the depth of experience behind that advice is what makes the difference. 
 
That reflects an approach we see clients value consistently: advice that is clear, commercially informed and grounded in experience. Technology remains important, but it is judgement, clarity and an understanding of the client’s commercial position that continue to distinguish external counsel when the issues are complex. In the current market, where every decision has a commercial impact, the value of counsel who will give you a clear view and stand behind it is hard to overstate. 
 
The same point applies across jurisdictions. Where a matter is being referred to another jurisdiction, firms are often looking for counsel who can assess the position quickly, take a view and communicate it clearly. That level of judgement is particularly important where the referring firm’s own client relationship depends on the quality and usability of the advice received. 

2. The right foundations make the biggest difference 

Another theme that was emphasised is the value of strong IP foundations. As brands face a growing number of threats - deepfakes, dupes and fast-moving infringers to name a few - businesses with well-structured portfolios and clear enforcement priorities are generally better placed to respond quickly and proportionately.

This is particularly important at a time when copying and imitation can move quickly across markets and digital channels. A strong filing strategy, supported by a clear view of enforcement priorities, gives businesses a more stable platform to protect the brand and manage risk.
 
Strong foundations do not eliminate risk, but they make it manageable. They also mean that when enforcement is needed, the process is faster, cleaner and far less disruptive to the business. 
 
Brands that have the most effective protection strategies tend to be those that build their protection around where the business was going, not just its current position. That requires counsel to understand the client’s commercial objectives well enough to advise on where protection is most valuable and which issues warrant action.  

3. The earlier IP is part of the conversation, the better the outcome 

A further theme across the week was the benefit of bringing IP counsel into the conversation early. IP is playing an increasingly central role in transactions, brand strategy and licensing decisions, and earlier input can often prevent issues from becoming more difficult and more expensive to resolve later.

Product development and design  

New product lines, packaging refreshes and design updates all carry IP implications that are far easier to address before launch than after. Clearance at the concept stage is straightforward. Clearance after a product has gone to market, or after a complaint has landed, is a different conversation. For businesses that move quickly, building IP into the development process is one of the most practical steps available.
 
Deals and investment 

Whether a business is acquiring, being acquired or bringing in investment, IP is playing a bigger role in deal processes than ever before. Businesses that have structured their protection well find that it actively supports the transaction rather than becoming a point of negotiation. Getting IP counsel involved at the due diligence stage, rather than later in the process, is one of the clearest ways to keep a deal moving. 
 
Brand expansion into new markets

Expanding into a new territory is an opportunity to get the foundations right from the start. A trade mark strategy that thinks beyond the filing, considering how the brand will be used, positioned and protected in that market, puts a business in a much stronger position as it grows. The earlier that conversation happens, the more useful it tends to be. 
 
What clients appear to value most in these situations is advice that is brought in early enough to shape decisions, rather than simply responding once a problem has arisen. Whether that is at the start of a product development cycle, ahead of a deal or when a new market is being considered, that is often where the input of IP advice with strong commercial understanding can make the greatest difference, because the guidance is tailored to the business objective from the outset. 
 
The same applies in multi-jurisdiction matters. Early input from local counsel helps to identify risks, shape strategy and avoid unnecessary urgency later in the process. For attorneys coordinating advice across several territories, this can make the process more efficient and the advice more useful to the wider matter. 
 
Final thoughts 
 
The conversations at INTA 2026 suggested a clear direction of travel. Clients are looking for external IP counsel who combine technical capability with sound judgement, commercial understanding and advice that is practical to act on. 
 
For in-house teams, that may mean looking for advice that supports commercial decision-making from the outset. For international firms, it may mean working with local counsel who can give a clear view, communicate it effectively and contribute as part of a wider cross-border strategy. 
  
If you need any support with these areas for your brand or clients, please get in touch.