VC-backed company just killed my EU trademark for a small OSS project

Summary

I run a small open-source project Deepkit (Trademark 017875717) I've been building for many years. It's not huge, just a few thousand users compared to the big OSS names, but to me it was worth protecting, so I trademarked the name in the EU and US a few years back. I had hoped to be protected from other corporations this way and live peacefully.A $160M-funded company named Deepki (Trademark 1751952) came along and filed for cancellation at EUIPO since they needed the trademark now after getting lots of funding. They won. Now my trademark is gone.The frustrating part? The EU actually does allow open-source (even free projects) to have trademarks, but you have to prove "genuine use" in the EU for the goods/services your trademark covers. Which seems to force you in collecting user sensitive data otherwise you are entirely unable to prove that you have actual users in the EU. I generally try to collect as little information as possible (also because I don't care where my users are coming from). I had google analytics running for some time on the main page (not documentation), but most of the time it didn't work and it seems most of my users block it anyway.Here's what I gave the EUIPO and why they said no:- Google Analytics for my site with a full country breakdown from 2018–2023. A few hundred to ~1,800 EU visitors per year per country. They said that’s "too small" to count as real commercial exploitation for my Class 9 software. Also, they said they couldn’t tell which goods those visits were actually for.- npmjs + GitHub stats - hundreds of thousands of downloads and thousands of stars. Rejected because there's no location data, so they couldn't confirm if the usage was in the EU. In some cases, they said the timeframes weren't even clear.- They basically kept repeating that they couldn't clearly link any of the usage to the specific goods/services my trademark was registered for.The conclusion:>Conclusion: It follows from the above that the EUTM proprietor has not...