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​ 

June 10, 2026
For multinational franchisors operating in Thailand, a key risk after franchise termination is that former outlets may continue operating in ways that could easily mislead consumers into believing they remain within the authorized network. To justify such operations, former franchisees often argue that the termination was invalid or ineffective. As a result, these cases are often treated as contractual disputes, making it difficult for franchisors to obtain injunctive relief before a final judgment confirms that the termination was lawful. Franchisors face significant commercial and reputational harm during lengthy proceedings, including consumer confusion, disruption to franchise restructuring, and damage to brand reputation and customer trust. In an encouraging development, the Thai court in a 2025 case responded to the problem of unauthorized post-termination franchise operations by granting interim relief, recognizing broader brand and consumer harm, and awarding substantial damages, highlighting a successful litigation strategy of framing the dispute not merely as a contractual termination issue but as trademark infringement causing ongoing commercial injury. The Subway Case From December 2024 to mid-2025, an unauthorized “Subway®” franchise operation in Thailand attracted substantial public and media attention. Reports and online discussions about unauthorized Subway® stores circulated widely after complaints arose about food quality and customer experience at certain outlets that were allegedly operating after their franchise rights had expired. Because these stores continued to use Subway® trademarks, trade dress, and overall commercial appearance, many consumers were unable to distinguish them from authorized operations, resulting in reputational risks and customer confusion that affected the franchisor’s brand and franchise system in Thailand. Subway treated this matter with the utmost seriousness and moved promptly to protect its brand, franchise system, and customers. It filed a civil action with the IP&IT Court seeking a permanent injunction and damages. During the proceedings, the court granted a preliminary injunction
May 22, 2026
Intellectual property specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins in Vietnam have contributed an updated Intellectual Property Transactions in Vietnam overview for Thomson Reuters Practical Law, an online publication that provides comprehensive legal guides for jurisdictions worldwide. The Vietnam overview was authored by Linh Thi Mai Nguyen, Thanh Phuong Vu, Chi Lan Dang, Son Thai Hoang, and Duc Anh Tran. The chapter provides a high-level examination of key aspects of IP transactions law in Vietnam, including IP assignment and licensing, research and development collaborations, IP in mergers and acquisitions (M&A), lending and taking security over intellectual property rights, settlement agreements, employee- and consultant-created IP, competition law, taxation, and non-tariff trade barriers. Key topics covered in the chapter include: IP assignment: Basis and formalities for assignments of patents, utility models, trade marks, copyright, design rights, trade secrets, confidential information, and domain names in Vietnam. IP licensing: Scope, formalities, and recordal requirements for licensing patents, trade marks, copyright, design rights, and trade secrets. Research and development collaborations: Treatment of improvements, derivatives, and joint ownership of IP, including exploitation and enforcement issues. IP aspects of M&A and security: Due diligence, warranties, transfer formalities, and taking security over intellectual property rights. Practical Law, a legal reference resource from Thomson Reuters, publishes a range of guides for hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The Intellectual Property Transactions Global Guide is a valuable resource for legal practitioners seeking comparative insight into transactional IP issues across multiple jurisdictions. To view the latest version of the Intellectual Property Transactions in Vietnam overview, please visit the Practical Law website and enroll in the free Practical Law trial to gain full access.
May 13, 2026
Laos has significantly broadened its industrial property administrative review framework, most notably by extending it to cover copyright and related rights for the first time. Decision No. 0306/IC on the Administrative Resolution of Disputes Concerning Industrial Property Registration, New Plant Variety Registration, and Copyright and Related Rights Recordation took effect on April 24, 2026, replacing the previous rules from 2023, which had covered only industrial property and new plant variety matters. Decision No. 0306/IC governs how Laos’ Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) and provincial offices handle formal challenges to industrial property registrations and applications. The proceedings covered include oppositions to pending applications, appeals of refused applications, requests for cancellation of existing registrations, and—newly—disputes concerning the recordation and interpretation of copyright and related rights. These administrative proceedings within the DIP are heard by a government-appointed Administrative Dispute Resolution Committee, which functions similarly to the opposition and review boards found in other jurisdictions. Key Changes Decision No. 0306/IC covers four categories of administrative proceedings: Oppositions: Third-party challenges to a pending industrial property application before it is granted. Refusal appeals: Challenges to the DIP’s decision to refuse their application. Cancellation or deletion requests: Applications to invalidate an existing registered right on the grounds that it should not have been granted. Copyright and related rights disputes: Challenges to or interpretations of copyright and related rights recordations, including determinations of whether a work qualifies for copyright protection under Lao law. The most significant development is the committee’s new jurisdiction over copyright matters. The committee is now empowered to resolve disputes concerning copyright and related rights recordation—this includes the authority to determine whether a work qualifies for copyright protection and to interpret the scope of an existing recordation. Parties who believe a competitor has improperly recorded copyright over a work, or who wish to contest
April 30, 2026
Vietnam’s Decree No. 134/2026/ND‑CP, which took effect on 9 April 2026, plays an important role in detailing and implementing Vietnam’s Intellectual Property (IP) Law in the context of rapid digital transformation and the growing application of artificial intelligence (AI). The new decree provides comprehensive guidance on the application of copyright and related‑rights regulations, addressing key issues such as authorship, ownership, statutory exceptions and limitations, registration procedures, and enforcement mechanisms. Through these measures, Decree 134 seeks to achieve an appropriate balance between safeguarding the legitimate interests of rightsholders and fostering innovation, research, and technological advancement, thereby strengthening the state’s framework for the effective management, protection, and exploitation of intellectual property in the digital and AI‑driven environment. Some notable aspects of Decree 134 are discussed below. Copyright for AI-Created Works Decree 134 provides important guidance on the determination of copyright and related rights in works created with the assistance of AI. Article 5a reaffirms the principle that human creativity remains central to copyright protection, clarifying that copyright or related rights arise only where a human makes a substantial and decisive intellectual contribution, exercises effective control over the creative outcome, and assumes responsibility for the content and its legality. At the same time, the provision confirms that AI is regarded solely as a technological tool rather than a rights‑holding subject, thus ensuring consistency with the fundamental concepts of authorship and ownership under the IP Law. By introducing requirements on transparency, proof of human contribution, and compliance with AI‑specific labelling and technical marking obligations, Decree 134 establishes a clear and enforceable legal framework for the responsible use of AI in creative activities. Lawful Use of Copyrighted Texts and Data Article 37a of Decree 134 sets out the specific conditions under which copyrighted texts and data may be lawfully used for scientific research, experimentation,