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

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.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 24, 2026
As food innovation continues to accelerate, manufacturers are increasingly introducing ingredients derived from new sources, produced using novel technologies, or lacking a significant history of human consumption. While these innovations create new opportunities for the food industry, they also raise important questions regarding consumer safety. For this reason, many jurisdictions, including Thailand, the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, and Singapore, require a premarket safety assessment for novel food ingredients before they can be placed on the market. The objective of this assessment is to ensure that each ingredient is safe for its intended use and level of consumption, does not present toxicological, allergenic, microbiological, or nutritional concerns, and will not mislead consumers. Scientific authorities typically evaluate the ingredient’s identity, manufacturing process, composition, specifications, anticipated dietary exposure, toxicological information, nutritional impact, and history of use before determining whether it can be marketed. Against this background, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently took an important step toward improving regulatory transparency by publishing, for the first time, a consolidated public list of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process, including substances determined to be novel foods and those determined not to fall within the novel food category. The list identifies the approved substances, the corresponding manufacturers or importers, approval dates, and the approved conditions of use. Although the publication does not change the existing legal framework governing novel food approvals, it provides businesses with greater visibility into the Thai FDA’s regulatory precedents and the types of substances that have previously been accepted through the safety assessment process. The full announcement is available on the Thai FDA’s website. As the list is now publicly available, it also provides useful insight into the types of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process.
July 24, 2026
Indonesia has updated its fee framework for intellectual property (IP)-related government services, with implications for IP owners, licensees, lenders, digital platforms, and businesses operating in the country. Government Regulation No. 30 of 2026 on Types and Tariffs of Non-Tax State Revenue Applicable to the Ministry of Law (GR 30/2026) was promulgated on July 2, 2026, and will take effect on August 1, 2026. Key Takeaways GR 30/2026, which replaces the relevant IP service fees under Government Regulation No. 45 of 2024, reorganizes the fee schedule into separate categories for copyright, industrial designs, patents, layout designs of integrated circuits, trade secrets, trademarks, geographical indications, IP enforcement, and other categories. The most commercially relevant changes include a new copyright recordation tariff exemption for songs and music, higher fees for several trademark and geographical indication services, new IP enforcement service fees, and a new fee type for registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects. In addition, this is the first major update for trademark fees in approximately 10 years. GR 30/2026 is significant not only as a fee update but also as a further indication of Indonesia’s increasing recognition of IP as a financeable commercial asset. By expressly assigning fees to the registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects, the regulation places IP-backed collateral filings within the Ministry of Law’s administrative service framework. While GR 30/2026 does not create a new secured-transactions regime, this development is relevant for lenders, borrowers, and IP owners structuring financing arrangements secured by trademarks, patents, copyrights, industrial designs, or other registrable IP rights in Indonesia. Copyright: New Fee Exemption for Songs and Music Recordation For copyright, GR 30/2026 creates a fee-exempt category for recordation of works or related-rights products for songs or music, while maintaining a separate category for other works and related-rights products. It
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
July 15, 2026
Ambush marketing refers to a strategy in which a business associates itself with an event, campaign, or brand without paying for official sponsorship rights. The tactic is most visible in sports, concerts, and festivals, where official sponsors have invested substantially for exclusivity. Ambush marketers may use suggestive wording, event-themed imagery, athlete endorsements, venue-adjacent promotions, or social media campaigns implying a commercial connection with the event. Common Forms of Ambush Marketing Ambush marketing typically takes one of the following forms: Direct ambushing: using event names, logos, or mascots suggesting authorization Coattail ambushing: sponsoring an athlete or broadcaster connected with the event Subtle ambushing: themed advertising, venue-adjacent campaigns, or similar visual cues The legal analysis in each case turns on whether the marketing crosses from permissible event-based advertising into infringement, passing off, deception, or wrongful exploitation of goodwill, and the risk assessment is necessarily fact-specific. Thailand has no dedicated ambush marketing statute, so legality depends on execution. A campaign that merely comments on a public event may be permissible, but one that uses protected marks, creates consumer confusion, misrepresents sponsorship status, or makes unsubstantiated claims may trigger liability under various Thai laws, as laid out below. Ambush Marketing and Thailand’s Trademark Act The Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) is the primary tool for addressing campaigns that use registered trademarks, event names, logos, mascots, or confusingly similar signs. The law gives registered trademark owners the exclusive right to use their mark for registered goods, and infringement risk arises when a nonsponsor uses an event mark or a confusingly similar sign in advertising. Even referential or playful use may create liability if it causes public confusion as to sponsorship or commercial connection. The law also preserves passing-off claims for unregistered marks. This matters because event names, taglines, or mascots may not always be