There have recently been a number of troubling developments in tobacco and alcohol legislation and regulation in Thailand that encroach upon intellectual property (IP). Other highly regulated products, such as cosmetics, food products, and drugs, are also feeling a regulatory pinch. These regulations have impinged legitimately granted IP rights and to a greater extent, rights to property, to engage in competition, and to free speech.

From the time Myanmar opened its doors to the international community in 2011, there has been an influx of inward investment and a multitude of new ventures established in the country. As intellectual property (IP) is a vital asset for many of these companies, there has been an ever-increasing need for Myanmar to adopt a robust IP regime—particularly one that provides a solid foundation for well-known trademarks, in support of the large, multinational companies looking to invest in the country.

The key legislation governing intellectual property (IP) in Laos is the Law No. 01/NA of December 20, 2011, on Intellectual Property, as amended (IP Law). The current incarnation of the IP Law includes salient provisions on industrial property, new plant varieties, and copyright and related rights.

Last year, 23 people were alleged to have been involved in the manipulation of three separate stocks. The investigations and prosecutions in these cases are ongoing. In light of recent events, this article explains the crime of stock manipulation, discusses the seminal Supreme Court decision on the matter, and identifies a potential new tool of enforcement for private citizens through the recently passed class action legislation. 

On February 2, 2015, the Ho Chi Minh City Court held a public trial for a dispute arising out of an infringement of an agrochemical patent. The trial attracted significant attention from IP practitioners as it was among the first patent litigation cases ever tried at Vietnamese courts. Additionally, the case was apparently the first time a foreign patentee had ever sought to enforce its patent rights before Vietnamese courts. The ruling in the case was to be a litmus test for Vietnam’s environment of patent enforcement.

Companies and individuals that admit to violating the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) for acts committed in Thailand risk criminal prosecution in Thai courts. When defendants in FCPA cases seek negotiated resolutions to their charges in the United States, they generally enter into guilty pleas, deferred prosecution deals, or non-prosecution agreements. By doing so, defendants formally admit to a set of facts and illegal conduct.

From the time the Royal Thai Armed Forces launched a coup d’état in May 2014 and Thailand’s reinstated military government embarked on an ambitious program to invigorate the country’s economy, numerous proposals have emerged to develop Thailand’s infrastructure, and especially, its inland transportation systems. Development of Thailand’s inland transportation systems is expected to improve the country’s logistics capabilities and help maintain a competitive advantage among the other ASEAN Member States.

With the biggest economy in ASEAN and the fourth-largest population in the world, Indonesia is an attractive location for franchisors. In this article, we will examine the process for registering franchise agreements in Indonesia, in order to provide guidance to those operating or planning to operate in this lucrative and highly competitive market.