You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

May 28, 2015

Cambodia’s Swift Accession to the Madrid Protocol

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

The Madrid System for the international registration of marks, governed by the Madrid Protocol, is gaining popularity across Southeast Asia. Several countries in the region are preparing to implement Madrid as part of their commitments toward regional integration via the ASEAN Economic Community, which will be created at the end of 2015. 

In the most recent development, Cambodia has surpassed the expectations of many observers by joining the Madrid Protocol on March 5, 2015, with the system set to enter into force on June 5, 2015. Cambodia moved quickly and is now the fourth ASEAN country to join the Madrid Protocol—following in the footsteps of Vietnam, Singapore, and the Philippines, and bypassing regional neighbors like Thailand and Indonesia, which are both in the process of preparing for accession.

As the Madrid Protocol will soon come into effect in the country, we will answer some of the key questions about how Cambodia is preparing to adopt the Madrid System.

How Are the Cambodian IP Authorities Preparing for the New System?

Online Registration of Marks

Article 1 of Prakas No. 206 on the Organization and Functioning of the Department of Intellectual Property, dated July 24, 2014 (Prakas No. 206), provides that the Department of Intellectual Property Rights in Cambodia (DIPR) will establish and manage a website of intellectual property rights to promote public awareness of IP laws and regulations, as well as to clarify registered IP rights.

On March 28, 2015, Mr. Sim Sokheng, Director of the DIPR, confirmed that the DIPR is preparing a website for the public to register and search online for national and international marks. By late August 2015, it will be possible to file for both national and international registration of marks online on the DIPR’s website.

The Law Concerning Marks, Trade Names, and Acts of Unfair Competition                

Mr. Sim has said that no amendments will be made to the Law Concerning Marks, Trade Names, and Acts of Unfair Competition, in order to comply with the Madrid Protocol. If any provisions of the law conflict with the Madrid Protocol, the Madrid Protocol will take precedence over the preexisting law.

Regulations on the Madrid System’s Registration Procedure

The DIPR is also preparing a draft regulation (referred to as a Prakas in Khmer) on the Procedures for Registration with the Madrid System, which will detail new procedures. This will come into force no later than June 6, 2015.

Will the IP Office Be Restructured?

According to a source at the Division of the Registration of Marks and Article 3 of Prakas No. 206, two separate divisions will be responsible for the national registration of marks and the international registration of marks. The new Prakas will provide further details about any organizational restructuring and the impact on examiners and registrars.

How Will International Applications Be Handled?

Under Article 5 of Prakas No. 206, the Division of International Registration of Marks will be established with the duties to:

  • establish procedures for the international registration of marks;
  •  prepare and implement such procedures; 
  • manage official fees for the international registration of marks and collaborate with the Administration and IT Division, Accounting Division, and the Financial Department of the Ministry of Commerce;
  • provide certificates of internationally-registered marks, as requested;
  • remind applicants of the use or non-use of marks;
  • fulfill duties to register and protect international marks to comply with the Madrid Protocol and other regulations on behalf of the Office of Origin and the Office of the Contracting Party; and
  • other duties assigned by the top management.

What Kind of Training Will Be Offered?

Article 1 of Prakas No. 206 provides that the DIPR will collaborate with the Training and Research Center of the Ministry of Commerce and related ministries to increase public awareness of intellectual property laws and regulations and to educate officers in the relevant government departments.

Mr. Sim has stated that the DIPR will conduct public training in the near future, and that a schedule will later be confirmed by the DIPR. One DIPR officer has said that, within this year, the DIPR will initially provide training to intellectual property agents.

What Trademark Search Mechanisms Will Be Available?

The DIPR will establish a website where people can conduct trademark searches for national and international marks.

How Will Trademark Owners Benefit?

Trademark owners will benefit greatly from using this tool for the international registration of marks. The Madrid System will provide a means of trademark protection in Cambodia that is faster and more effective than the DIPR’s current system of trademark protection, and so we can expect to see a growth in confidence among brand owners with interests in the country.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.
Read More
August 13, 2026
Modern agricultural machinery is no longer purely mechanical but instead technology dependent. Modern tractors, harvesters, and other farm equipment increasingly incorporate embedded software, electronic control units, sensors, and digital diagnostic systems. While such technologies enhance efficiency, productivity, and precision farming, they also affect the manner of equipment repair and maintenance. As a result, farmers and independent repair providers may have little practical choice but to rely on authorized dealers, even for routine maintenance and repairs. Section 36 of Thailand’s Patent Act reflects the principle that the authorized sale of a patented invention usually exhausts the exclusive right of the patent owner over the specific product. This means that upon legal sale of the patented product, it can typically be used or resold without further authorization from the patent holder. This principle is relatively straightforward when applied to traditional mechanical equipment. Ownership of a machine ordinarily carries with it the practical ability to diagnose faults, replace worn parts, and restore the equipment to working order. Modern agricultural machinery, however, increasingly depends on embedded software, proprietary diagnostic systems, firmware updates, and other digital resources that may remain under the control of the manufacturer or patent holder. This tension lies within the “right to repair” debate. In the United States, on July 8, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission and five states announced a settlement with Deere & Company resolving allegations that Deere had unlawfully restricted farmers’ and independent repair providers’ ability to repair their equipment. Under the terms of the settlement, for the next ten years, Deere must provide repair resources, including software capabilities, on terms equivalent to those provided to authorized dealers. The Deere settlement highlights that the nature of ownership is changing, but legal concepts have not kept pace. Traditional patent-law concepts, including patent exhaustion, were developed with physical products
Read More
August 10, 2026
Thailand has finalized its social media KYC (“know your customer”) rules under Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers (No. 2), which was published in the Government Gazette on May 5, 2026, and will take effect on November 1, 2026. While an early draft of the notification proposed requiring social media platforms to arrange identification of every user account, the final notification is significantly more targeted, focusing on paid online advertising and advertiser identity verification. Though the regulatory initiative primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes, it also has important consequences for intellectual property enforcement, because the verified platform records that will be generated under the new requirements can help IP rights holders to identify anonymous online infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The notification requires social media service providers to verify the identity of advertisers before their paid advertisements are published and disseminated in Thailand through social media, regardless of whether the advertising fees come from the advertisers or third parties. Verification of an advertiser is valid for one year, after which verification would have to be performed again before the platform could publish additional paid advertisements from the advertiser. Permitted verification methods are specified under the notification. A platform may verify an advertiser by checking identity evidence and confirming the connection between the advertiser and that identity evidence, with the notification giving facial comparison against certain government-issued identity documents as an example. Alternatively, platforms may verify advertisers through a digital identity verification and authentication system with an identity-proofing assurance level not lower than the level prescribed by Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Commission. The notification further requires platforms to retain only the advertiser’s information necessary to identify the advertiser, beginning from the start of the advertising activity and for
Read More
August 6, 2026
Introduction: A Trademark Paradox in Sustainable Packaging Walk into any Thai supermarket, and the label-free water bottle is no longer a novelty. Thailand’s packaging market, valued at approximately USD 15.68 billion in 2025, is shifting toward minimalist, plastic-light designs as ESG pressures reshape how brands present their products. The country generated roughly 5.68 million tons of plastic waste in 2021, with a recycling rate of only 19 percent, and regulators are now considering rules that would allow label-free bottled water relying on embossing, laser printing, or QR codes instead of wrap-around labels. As packaging itself becomes the brand identifier, a paradox emerges: designs built to say the least often struggle hardest for protection under Thai intellectual property law. The Trademark Barrier: When Shape Is Not Enough Section 7, paragraph 2(10) of the Thai Trademark Act deems a shape distinctive only if it is not the natural form of the goods, is not necessary to achieve a technical result, and does not add value to the goods. The Department of Intellectual Property’s 2022 examination guidelines apply this test conservatively, as the following examples illustrate. A plain water bottle relying on subtle contours to signal its brand is typically read as just another bottle, not a source identifier. Acquired distinctiveness offers a theoretical escape route, but it demands extensive evidence of sales, advertising, and consumer recognition—an especially heavy burden for new entrants whose minimalist packaging has not yet achieved market prominence. The result is a structural bias against precisely the design innovation that sustainability goals are meant to encourage. Design Patents: A Partial, Imperfect Substitute Design patent protection, covering a product’s shape, configuration, or ornamentation, appears to offer an alternative route. In practice, it is constrained by the same forces driving the minimalist trend. Because many brands converge on similar solutions—clear
Read More